Torture and ill-treatment in police detention remain grave concern [ID 14040]

"Torture and ill-treatment in police detention remained a grave concern. Although there were far fewer reports of the use of torture methods such as electric shocks, falaka (beatings on the soles of the feet) and suspension by the arms, there were regular reports of detainees being beaten, stripped naked, sexually harassed and denied adequate sleep, food, drink and use of the toilet.

One reason for the persistence of torture and ill-treatment in detention was the failure of law enforcement officials to follow prescribed procedures, including the duty to inform detainees of their rights and to allow access to legal counsel. Lawyers said that in some cases they were told by police officers that a detainee did not wish to see them without providing any evidence of this. Other contributing factors included inadequate documenting of torture and ill-treatment in medical reports, and the acceptance as evidence by courts of statements extracted under torture.

Disproportionate use of force by police during demonstrations was widespread. Television news programs regularly broadcast scenes of demonstrators being beaten, kicked and ill-treated by law enforcement officials. Groups particularly targeted during demonstrations included supporters of the political party DEHAP (Democratic People's Party), leftist parties, trade unionists, students and anti-war activists.

Of particular concern were the many allegations of people being abducted by plainclothes police and then tortured or ill-treated. These incidents of unrecorded detention were almost impossible to investigate and the perpetrators continued to enjoy impunity.
[...]"

11.03.2008 - Source: US Department of State

Torture and other Ill-treatment ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2007") [ID 22804]

"Human rights organizations reported a rise in cases of torture and abuse during the year. In a July 5 report, Amnesty International (AI) noted that a "culture of impunity" allowed police and Jandarma to escape accountability for torture and enabled courts to disregard medical evidence of torture and accept as evidence statements allegedly extracted under torture.

The Ministry of Justice reported that it opened 45 torture cases during the year, involving 298 suspects and a total of 178 victims. The suspects comprised 263 police, 15 Jandarma, and 20 other public servants. The justice ministry reported that it opened 34 excessive force cases during the year, involving 65 suspects and 49 victims. The suspects comprised 56 police, seven Jandarma, and two other public servants.

According to the HRA and Mazlum-Der, there were 451 incidents of torture in the first six months of the year. The HRF reported that during the year 452 persons applied to HRF's centers for assistance. Of these, 248 cases involved torture or abuse inflicted during the year; the rest involved incidents that occurred previously. HRF stated that there were 10,449 credible reports of torture or abuse from 1990 to 2005. A number of human rights observers claimed that only a small percentage of detainees reported torture and abuse because they feared retaliation or believed that complaining was futile. 

In a July 5 report, the NGO Societal Legal Research Foundation discussed the circumstances of 34 torture complaints it received between March 2006 and February 28. The victims comprised 23 men, 10 women, and one transsexual individual. Thirty-three victims said they were tortured for political reasons. Methods allegedly used by officers included burning skin with cigarettes, squeezing testicles, administering electrical charges, beating with batons, using tear gas, and withholding food and water. Police officers were charged but not convicted in four of the cases. Investigation into the remaining 30 cases was ongoing.

The Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) and domestic human rights observers reported that, because detention periods were reduced to 24 hours in 2005, with prosecutorial discretion to extend the period to 48 hours, security officials for the most part eliminated more severe methods of torture and abuse, such as use of electric shocks, high-pressure cold water hoses, rape, beatings on the soles of the feet and genitalia, hanging by the arms, and burns. Instead, security officials mainly used methods that did not leave physical signs, including repeated slapping, exposing detainees to cold, stripping and blindfolding detainees, food and sleep deprivation, threatening detainees or their family members, dripping water on detainees' heads, isolation, and mock executions. 

Human rights activists, attorneys, and physicians who treated victims said that because of increased punishments for torture and abuse, police who engaged in these practices often did so outside of police detention centers to avoid detection.  

Human rights activists maintained that those arrested for ordinary crimes were as likely to suffer torture and mistreatment in detention as those arrested for political offenses such as speaking out against the government, although they were less likely to report abuse. Observers believed that security officials usually tortured political detainees to intimidate them and send a warning to others with similar political views. Authorities allegedly tortured some suspects to obtain confessions."

Document(s): Open document

11.03.2008 - Source: US Department of State

Electroshock Treatment (as of 2007) ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2007") [ID 22976]

"

The NGO Mental Disability Rights International (MDRI) announced that use of electroconvulsive or "shock" treatment without anesthesia was not practiced but that there remains no legal ban on the treatment method. In 2005 MDRI released a report stating that persons with mental disabilities in the country were subject to treatment "tantamount to torture." Following a two-year study, MDRI claimed the country lacked community-based support for mental patients and offered no alternative to state institutions where the mentally disabled were held separately from society in "prison-like incarceration."

In February a public prosecutor opened an investigation into reports of abuse at the Ekrem Tok Mental Hospital in Adana. The Ministry of Health and Adana Provincial Health Directorate also began investigations. The investigations were opened after Star TV aired a program that showed patients at the hospital complaining about electro-shock treatment, beatings, and abuse. According to the program, patients were subject to beatings and violence for performing religious prayers, for not eating, or for not cleaning their plates after a meal. Hurriyet reported that a patient died of a drug overdose in the facility in August 2006. Police arrested two staff members, Huseyin Hatipogul and Nusret Er, for mistreating patients.

"

Document(s): Open document

31.01.2008 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Ill-treatment on the rise in 2007 ("World Report 2008") [ID 23470]

"Ill-treatment appeared to be on the rise in 2007 and was regularly reported as occurring during arrest, outside places of official detention, and in the context of demonstrations, as well as in detention centers. This trend was further exacerbated by the passing in June of a new police law granting wide-ranging powers of stop and search. After the new law came into force, cases of police brutality were also reported in the context of the routine identity checks permitted in the new law. There were continuing reports of ill-treatment in prisons and, in January, conscientious objector Halil Savda was ill-treated at the Tekirdağ military barracks. "

Document(s): Open document

06.11.2007 - Source: European Commission

Downward trend in the number of reported cases of torture and illtreatment ("Turkey 2007 Progress Report [SEC(2007) 1436]") [ID 22351]

"The legislative safeguards introduced by the zero tolerance policy on torture continue to have positive effects. The downward trend in the number of reported cases of torture and illtreatment was confirmed. The reforms regarding access to lawyers have shown positive results (See access to justice). Turkey pursued its efforts to strengthen the system for the medical examination of alleged cases of abuse. The number of forensic medicine centres in Turkey has been increased, and the Council for Forensic Medicine started a project to strengthen the implementation of the Istanbul Protocol.*

However, cases of torture and ill-treatment are still being reported, especially during arrest and outside detention centres. There is no independent monitoring of places of detention by independent national bodies, pending the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture.

The use of statements obtained in the absence of legal counsel or which are not confirmed in front of a judge is prohibited by the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the Court of Cassation ruled that the ban on the use of such statements does not apply retroactively. There are cases where lower Courts have not removed such evidence from the case file, although allegations of ill-treatment were made by the defendant.

There is a need to strengthen the independence of the Council for Forensic Medicine -which is under the Ministry of Justice- and to improve the overall quality of its medical reports. Furthermore, medical examinations sometimes take place in the presence of a law enforcement officer. Victims of torture and ill-treatment rely essentially on rehabilitation services provided by NGOs. This is partly due to the lack or inaccessibility of state-sponsored services for victims of torture and ill-treatment.

The fight against impunity of human rights violations remains an area of concern. There is a lack of prompt, impartial and independent investigation into allegations of human rights violations by members of security forces. Furthermore, judicial proceedings into allegations of torture and ill-treatment are often delayed by the lack of efficient trial procedures or abuse of such procedures.

Overall, the Turkish legal framework includes a comprehensive set of safeguards against torture and ill-treatment. However, cases still occur, especially before detention starts. The fight against impunity remains an area of concern. Turkey needs to investigate more thoroughly allegations that there have been human rights violations by members of the security forces.

[footnote: * Istanbul Protocol: Manual on the effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, submitted to the United National Human Rights Commissioner for Human Rights, 9 August 1999]"

Document(s): Open document

28.09.2007 - Source: Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

Contribution on torture in Turkey, slight improvement of legal situation; yet number of legal aspects need to be dealt with; includes assessment of 2006-07 torture in Turkey ("Written contribution on Torture [HDIM.NGO/230/07]") [ID 21936]

Document(s): Report

07.2007 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Police Ill-treatment ("Human Rights Concerns in the Lead up to July Parliamentary Elections") [ID 24660]

"Reports of torture and ill-treatment remain much lower than in the 1990s, when torture was pandemic in police stations throughout Turkey, and especially in Turkey’s anti-terror units. As a result of legislative and other reforms that, among other things, shortened detention periods, abolished incommunicado detention, and allow all detainees, including those detained under the Anti-Terror Law, to consult with their lawyer from the first moments of detention, there has been a decrease in reports of torture and other ill-treatment. In fact, the greatest reduction has occurred in the anti-terror departments of police precincts.

Ill-treatment of detainees at the time of arrest and outside official places of detention remains a worrying and widely reported practice, however, especially for those apprehended on suspicion of committing ordinary crimes such as theft.

On June 2, 2007, a new law amending the Law on the Powers and Duties of the Police (Law no. 5681) was rushed through parliament. Among other provisions, the law greatly increases the authority of the police to stop and search individuals whom they suspect of committing crimes. While it is too early to evaluate the effect of the new law, these wide-ranging new stop and search powers raise concern because there is no mechanism for monitoring their application or preventing their abuse."

Document(s): Open document

08.11.2006 - Source: European Commission

Torture and ill-treatment (legal framework includes safeguards against torture and ill-treatment; human rights violations in the Southeast; problem of impunity) ("Turkey 2006 Progress Report") [ID 19019]

"With regard to torture and ill-treatment, a comprehensive legislative framework is in place. The downward trend has continued in the number of cases of torture and ill-treatment.

The reforms in detention procedures and detention periods have shown positive results on the ground. The regulation concerning the system for the medical examination of persons in police or gendarmerie custody complies with previous recommendations from the Committee on the Prevention of Torture.

However, implementing the legislative reforms undertaken in previous years remains a challenge. Cases of torture and ill-treatment are still being reported, in particular outside detention centres.

With respect to some provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedures and of the Law on execution of sentences, the notification of a relative of the detained person and the right to access a lawyer are not uniformly applied. Furthermore, while the Code introduced provisions against the use of statements obtained under torture, concerns remain on statements obtained prior to the enactment of the Code. [...]

Concerns remain with regard to the confidentiality and quality of medical examinations. There is a need to further strengthen the independence of the Institute of Forensic Medicine Institute and to make further efforts to implement the Istanbul Protocol throughout the country. The Human Rights Boards have yet to assume a more prominent role in the on-site monitoring of law enforcement establishments. Since October 2005, the Boards carried out 992 visits to police stations and detention centres.

The human rights situation in the Southeast raises particular concerns following the violent disturbances that took place in several cities in March and April [...]. Over 550 people were detained as a result of these events, including over 200 children. The Diyarbakir Bar Association submitted more than 70 complaints of ill-treatment to the authorities. Subsequently, investigations were launched into 39 of these claims.

During the events in Diyarbakir, forensic examinations of detainees were carried out in places of detention. This contravenes the rules and the circulars issued by the Ministries of Justice and Health as well as the independence of the medical profession.

The new provisions introduced in June 2006 to amend the anti-terror law could undermine the fight against torture and ill-treatment [...].

Despite an increase in the number of convictions since 2003, the fight against impunity remains an area of concern.

Overall, the Turkish legal framework includes a comprehensive set of safeguards against torture and ill-treatment. Cases of torture and ill-treatment declined over the reporting period. However, concerns remain regarding cases outside detention centres, human rights violations in the Southeast and the problem of impunity."

Document(s): Open document

06.09.2006 - Source: BBC News

The country is reportedly still staging unfair trials under anti-terror laws; evidence extracted under torture is often used and some people are being held on remand for more than a decade ("Turkey 'unfair trials' condemned") [ID 17743]

Document(s): Open document

21.03.2006 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Report on the current situation of illtreatment and detention in turkey ("Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak - Follow-up to the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur: Visits to Azerbaijan, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Romania, the Russian Federation, Spain, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Venezuela [E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2]") [#47790],  [ID 15520]

for more detailed information please refer to the original document below

"312. According to information received from NGOs, the burden of proving that the detainee was subjected to torture or ill-treatment is still on the detainee. The detainee has to demonstrate conclusive proof that he or she was subjected to torture or ill-treatment. 313. The Government informed that according to Article 148 of the Criminal Procedure Code, statements obtained by the use of prohibited methods shall not be considered as evidence, even if the accused has given their consent. This issue is addressed in training activities of law enforcement agencies. As a safeguard against the use of evidence obtained by torture or other ill-treatment, a new paragraph was added to Article 38 of the Constitution which provides that evidence obtained by prohibited means cannot be admitted in evidence. The accused person does not bear the burden of proving that the statement was obtained by prohibited means. 315. According to information received from NGOs, there has been no significant change in practice regarding the investigation of torture allegations. There are no specialized personnel employed to investigate torture allegations. The judiciary still appears unwilling to investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment. 316. The Government informed that torture and ill-treatment are punishable by sentences of up to 15 years’ imprisonment. Accordingly, allegations of torture and ill-treatment are taken seriously and diligently by the judiciary at all stages of the investigation and trial process. The Government reported that the State Security Courts have been abolished. 319. The Government informed that according to Article 50 of the Criminal Code, commutations only apply to offences which are punishable by short term imprisonment of up to one year. Torture is an offence punishable by three to 15 years’ imprisonment and ill-treatment is an offence punishable by two to five years’ imprisonment. Accordingly, penalties for torture and ill-treatment cannot be commuted. According to Article 51 of the Criminal Code, suspensions can only be applied to sentences of imprisonment of up to two years. Accordingly, sentences imposed for torture cannot be suspended. Sentences imposed for ill-treatment cannot be suspended if they exceed two years’ imprisonment. Amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Code on 7 August 2003, stipulate that investigations and prosecutions for torture and ill-treatment must be treated as urgent matters and dealt with as priority cases. According to the amendments, cases related to these offences cannot be adjourned for a period of more than 30 days unless there are compelling reasons. These cases must also be dealt with during judicial holidays. The Government also reported that as of January 2003, it is no longer necessary to obtain prior administrative authorization before prosecuting public officials on charges of torture and ill-treatment. Furthermore, sentences imposed under Article 243 (torture) and Article 245 (ill-treatment) of the Criminal Code can no longer be converted into fines.  "

Document(s): Open document

08.03.2006 - Source: US Department of State

Report on the situation of torture and ill-treatment in Turkey ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2005") [#46152],  [ID 15846]

for more detailed information please refer to the original document

"The law prohibits such practices; however, members of the security forces continued to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse persons regularly. Incidents of torture and abuse declined during the year but remained widespread. Courts rarely convicted security officials accused of torture and tended to issue light sentences when they did convict (see section 1.d.). According to the HRF, there were 657 credible cases of torture or abuse reported at its 5 national treatment centers through November. Of these, 180 cases involved torture or abuse inflicted during the year; the rest involved incidents that occurred previously. A number of human rightsobserversclaimed that only a small percentage of detainees reported torture and abuse because they feared retaliation or believed that complaining was futile."

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2006 - Source: Human Rights Watch

Report on new programme to eradicate torture, in which provincial human rights bodies monitor local police stations (current situation in police stations, monitoring not yet consistent and countrywide, effectiveness of board visits, independence of police station visiting delegations) ("Turkey: First Steps Toward Independent Monitoring of Police Stations and Gendarmeries") [#45789],  [ID 14006]

Document(s): Open document

23.02.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

Laut Studie von Amnesty International, Stiftung Pro Asyl und Holtfort-Stiftung werden unter Folter erpresste Geständnisse weiterhin vor Gerichten als Beweis zugelassen und tragen entscheidend zur Urteilsfindung bei ("Gutachten belegt: Erfolterte Geständnisse werden in der Türkei weiterhin als Beweis zugelassen") [#46931],  [ID 14007]

Document(s): Open document

21.12.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Possible risks for returnees because of German-Turkish exchange of information on criminal convictions; in recent years no information on cases of torture of deportees (in particular Kurdish political activists; expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 21.12.2005 an OVG Berlin - 6 B 8.04 -") [#41870],  [ID 14008]

Document(s): Open document

10.2005 - Source: UK Border Agency (Home Office)

Torture ("Country Report - October 2005") [#40563],  [ID 14009]

for more detailed information seek out the original document at page 74

"6.19 The European Commission 2005 report stated:

“With regard to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment, although reports of torture and ill-treatment are still frequent, the broad assessment of international and Turkish NGOs, as well as experts on the ground, such as lawyers and forensic doctors, is that incidence is diminishing. The President of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) stated in October 2004 that ‘it would be difficult to find a Council of Europe Member State with a more advanced set of provisions in this area’ while adding that, it is nevertheless ‘right to underline that Turkey needs to pursue vigorously its efforts to combat torture and other forms of ill-treatment’. In particular, further efforts are required to ensure full implementation of existing legislation and to reinforce the fight against impunity.” [71e] (p22)

6.20 The EC 2005 report also noted:

“As regards implementation, practice varies considerably throughout Turkey, although overall the situation continues to improve and both Bar Associations and NGOs confirm that reports of torture and ill-treatment are diminishing. According to these sources, severe forms of torture and ill-treatment are now rarely used and reports of ill-treatment in places of detention are less frequent than in the past. However, reports of ill-treatment outside of detention centres are still common, in particular, during the transportation of detainees, or in the context of demonstrations…Of the total complaints received by the Human Rights Presidency between October 2004 and March 2005 a significant proportion continue to relate to torture and ill-treatment. [71e] (p22-23) The government has remained committed to the fight against torture and ill-treatment, continuing to pursue a zero-tolerance policy towards torture. Nonetheless, on the ground, cases of torture and ill-treatment continue to be reported. Detainees are still not always made aware of their rights by the law enforcement bodies and prosecutors do not always promptly and adequately conduct investigations against public officials accused of torture. Continued efforts will be necessary to eradicate these methods, including the consistent imposition of appropriate sanctions on the perpetrators of torture and ill-treatment.” [71e] (p137)

6.21 As noted in the Amnesty International Turkey Memorandum of August 2005:

“Amnesty International has been greatly concerned about the issue of torture and ill-treatment perpetrated by members of the security forces in Turkey for many years and sees this area as the testing ground for the reforms undertaken by the government. No issue more clearly illustrates the uneven impact of the reforms, the problems in their implementation and the need for further steps in order to eliminate the violations… Unfortunately, this is a challenge which the government still appears to be failing to meet. Torture and ill-treatment continues to be a widespread problem in Turkey. Amnesty International has raised its concerns regarding the statistics collected by the Human Rights Boards attached to the Prime Ministry but even these confirm that torture and ill-treatment continue to be a serious and widespread problem in Turkey… The repeated incidence of torture and ill-treatment in Turkey – despite the government’s programme – shows clearly that further measures are necessary in order to eradicate torture by state agents. The eradication of torture should be seen as the achievement of conditions in which torture and ill-treatment are extremely unlikely; they will occur, if at all, only in isolated cases; and if they do occur, there will be a reaction from the authorities which prevents the perpetrator from repeating the act, which satisfies conditions of justice and reparation, and which condemns the act in such a way that other public officials will be deterred from similar conduct. At the moment, this is far from the case in Turkey. The ‘zero tolerance for torture’ policy appears to be limited to legislative changes (such as increasing the punishment for individuals convicted of torture or allowing access of detainees to lawyers) and training given to police officers.” [12s] (Section on Concerns about continued torture and ill-treatment and impunity)

6.22 The AI 2005 Annual Report on Turkey noted that:

“Detention regulations that provided better protection for detainees led to an apparent reduction in the use of some torture techniques, such as suspension by the arms and falaka (beatings on the soles of the feet). However, the regulations were often not fully implemented. Torture and ill-treatment in police and gendarmerie custody continued to be a serious concern with cases of beatings, electric shock, stripping naked and death threats being reported. Torture methods which did not leave lasting marks on the detainee’s body were also widely reported. Deprivation of food, water and sleep and making detainees stand in uncomfortable positions continued to be reported, despite a circular from the Minister of the Interior prohibiting the use of such techniques. In addition, people were beaten during arrest, while being driven around or after being taken to a deserted place for questioning.” [12r]"

Document(s): Open document

28.09.2005 - Source: Guardian

Human rights abuses, torture and starvation reported in country's psychiatric institutions ("Torture claims threaten Turkey's bid to join EU") [#37074],  [ID 14549]

Document(s): Open document

20.09.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

On risk of arrest because of pending trial according to old Turkish Penal Code; situation concerning torture is not accurately described in German foreign office's report of May 2005 (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 20.09.2005 an VG Sigmaringen - A 5 K 10656/04 -") [#38334],  [ID 14010]

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Amnesty International (AI) - Originaltitel: "Memorandum on AI's recommendations to the government to address human rights violations" ("Memorandum on AI's recommendations to the government to address human rights violations") [#38256],  [ID 14011]

"CONCERNS ABOUT CONTINUED TORTURE AND ILL-TREATMENT AND IMPUNITY
Amnesty International has been greatly concerned about the issue of torture and ill-treatment perpetrated by members of the security forces in Turkey for many years and sees this area as the testing ground for the reforms undertaken by the government. No issue more clearly illustrates the uneven impact of the reforms, the problems in their implementation and the need for further steps in order to eliminate the violations. Amnesty International has warmly welcomed the “zero tolerance for torture” policy articulated by the government and the associated improvements made to detention and other regulations in order to improve the protection from torture and ill-treatment for detainees in police and gendarmerie custody. The organization is also heartened by the steps taken by the government in response to the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) to communicate to state officials the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, such as the circulars issued by the Ministry of the Interior to police stations urging them to respect detainee’s rights. The CPT in the report of its September 2003 visit to Turkey concluded that:
The legislative and regulatory framework necessary to combat effectively torture and other forms of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials has been put in place; the challenge now is to make sure that all of the provisions concerned are given full effect in practice. Unfortunately, this is a challenge which the government still appears to be failing to meet. Torture and ill-treatment continues to be a widespread problem in Turkey. Amnesty International has raised its concerns regarding the statistics collected by the Human Rights Boards attached to the Prime Ministry but even these confirm that torture and ill-treatment continue to be a serious and widespread problem in Turkey. According to these figures, 158 individuals complained of torture and ill-treatment to the Boards in 2004. This was the highest figure for any type of violation collected by the Boards in that year. Figures collected by independent non-governmental organizations also give a disturbing picture related to continued problems in this area. For example, the Human Rights Association (IHD) stated that it had documented 843 reports of torture and ill-treatment in 2004. The repeated incidence of torture and ill-treatment in Turkey – despite the government’s programme – shows clearly that further measures are necessary in order to eradicate torture by state agents. The eradication of torture should be seen as the achievement of conditions in which torture and ill-treatment are extremely unlikely; they will occur, if at all, only in isolated cases; and if they do occur, there will be a reaction from the authorities which prevents the perpetrator from repeating the act, which satisfies conditions of justice and reparation, and which condemns the act in such a way that other public officials will be deterred from similar conduct. At the moment, this is far from the case in Turkey. The “zero tolerance for torture” policy appears to be limited to legislative changes (such as increasing the punishment for individuals convicted of torture or allowing access of detainees to lawyers) and training given to police officers. Amnesty International believes that an effective policy of combating torture would require the following:
· Legislative and other safeguards including an independent body that will carry out regular and ad hoc unannounced visits to places of detention;
· Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture; · The introduction of video and audio recording of all interviews of suspects in custody;
· Meaningful training of police, gendarmerie, judges and prosecutors regarding the legal changes and international standards, which comprises more than the issuing of circulars and directives;
· Clear guidelines to law enforcement officials – including a Code of Ethics – that would cover their responsibilities during interrogation and detention;
· The existence of clear sanctions for any law enforcement officials who may break such guidelines;
· Immediate and urgent impartial investigations into any allegations of violations of human rights by members of the security forces in accordance with the UN Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
· The development of an effective complaints mechanism able to carry out investigations into human rights violations;
· The urgent opening of criminal and disciplinary proceedings in relation to such violations with appropriate sanctions against anyone found responsible for these;
· The examination of the responsibility of commanding officers where law enforcement officials are alleged to have perpetrated serious human rights violations;
· The suspension from duty of officers under investigation for torture and serious ill-treatment and dismissal if found guilty;
· Compensation for and rehabilitation of the victims."

Document(s): Open document

31.07.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

AI: Report on the reform process; freedom of speech and freedom of press constricted by new turkish penal law; torture still common; health care; violence against women ("Länderkurzinfo der Koordinationsgruppe Türkei der deutschen Sektion") [#34626],  [ID 14012]

"Trotz Verbesserungen auf rechtlicher Ebene (u. a. Verkürzung der Dauer der Polizeihaft, Recht auf sofortigen Anwaltszugang für alle Festgenommenen) sind Folter und Misshandlungen noch immer weit verbreitet. Selbst das im Amt des Ministerpräsidenten angesiedelte Direktorium für Menschenrechte bestätigt, dass Folter und Misshandlungen ein schwerwiegendes und weitverbreitetes Problem sind. Nach seiner Statistik standen im Jahr 2004 Beschwerden wegen Folter mit 158 Personen an erster Stelle der Beschwerden. Die Zahlen der unabhängigen Menschenrechtsorganisationen lagen deutlich höher. Die Menschenrechtsstiftung der Türkei (TIHV) gab im Juni 2005 bekannt, dass im Jahr 2004 insgesamt 922 Personen bei der Stiftung einen Antrag auf kostenlose Behandlung von Beschwerden infolge von Folter gestellt haben, während es im Jahr 2003 insgesamt 925 Personen gewesen seien. Auch amnesty international erhält weiterhin kontinuierlich neue Informationen über Folterungen.

Der von der AKP-Regierung angekündigten Politik der „Null Toleranz“ gegenüber der Folter widersprechen Stellungnahmen türkischer Politiker, die von einem mangelnden Problembewusstsein gegenüber der Praxis der Folter zeugen. So erklärte der türkische Ministerpräsident Recep Tayyip Erdoğan im Oktober 2004 vor der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarats und bei Gesprächen mit Pressevertretern in Deutschland, es gäbe in seinem Land keinerlei Folter, weder systematische noch nicht systematische. Menschenrechtsorganisationen, die dies anzweifelten, bezeichnete er als "ideologisch verblendet“ und unterstellte ihnen, Beziehungen zu Terrororganisationen zu haben [4] .

Die Frage, ob die Folter in der Türkei „systematisch“ sei, hat auch im Zusammenhang mit dem EU-Kommissionsbericht vom Oktober 2004 Diskussionen ausgelöst. Eine solche Klassifizierung kann nur sinnvoll sein, wenn der Begriff zugleich konkret definiert wird. Der ehemalige Erweiterungskommissar Verheugen vertrat die Position, systematisch sei Folter nur, wenn sie von der Regierung angeordnet wird. Dies ist eine sehr enge und auch problematische Definition, da man die direkte Anordnung einer Regierung nur sehr selten wird nachweisen können. Die Menschenrechtsstiftung der Türkei berief sich in der Debatte um den Begriff auf folgende Definition: Systematisch sei Folter, wenn sie eine „administrative Praxis (ist), wenn trotz des Verbots von Folter und Misshandlungen die Vorgesetzten derartige Taten dulden, nichts in Richtung Bestrafung unternehmen, eine Wiederholung nicht verhindert wird oder wenn trotz einer hohen Anzahl von Beschwerden hochrangige Offizielle keine Ermittlungen zur Überprüfung der Richtigkeit einleiten oder den Beschwerdeführern keine Möglichkeit gegeben wird, ihre Beschwerde einer neutralen Gerichtsbarkeit vorzulegen“ [5]. Abgesehen von dem letzten Punkt – Folteropfer haben die Möglichkeit, sich vor Gericht zu beschweren, wenn auch unter großen Schwierigkeiten, oftmals in Form von Bedrohungen durch die Polizei, und meist mit geringem Erfolg – treffen diese Kriterien auf die Türkei noch immer zu: Folter ist weit verbreitet, trotz positiver Schritte auf gesetzlicher Ebene gibt es in der Praxis keine wirksamen Kontrollmechanismen, da die staatlichen regionalen und lokalen Menschenrechtskommissionen weder ausreichende Befugnis noch Expertise und teilweise scheinbar auch keine ausreichende Bereitschaft haben, um adäquate Untersuchungen durchzuführen, und da die direkt Verantwortlichen – die Leitungsebene der Polizei und die Staatsanwaltschaften – ihrer Aufgabe zur Verhinderung der Folter nicht nachkommen und dafür vom Staat bzw. der Justiz nicht zur Verantwortung gezogen werden.

Die Vorschriften zur Ingewahrsamnahme und Vernehmung durch Polizei und Gendarmerie werden nach Erkenntnissen von amnesty international in der Praxis vielfach nicht eingehalten. So werden Besuche von Anwälten oft verhindert, medizinische Untersuchungen von Festgenommenen werden entgegen den Vorschriften vielfach in Anwesenheit von Angehörigen der Sicherheitskräfte durchgeführt. In diesem Zusammenhang drückten türkische Menschenrechtsorganisationen ihre Besorgnis über den Mangel an Unabhängigkeit des Gerichtsmedizinischen Instituts aus, welches eine faktische Monopolstellung bei der Erstellung von Gutachten über erlittene Folter hat. Anlass für Kritik war die Ernennung von Dr. Nur Birgen zur Leiterin der Abteilung des Gerichtsmedizinischen Instituts, die für Gutachten über Folterfälle zuständig ist. Gegen Dr. Birgen wurden von der Türkischen Ärztekammer mehrfach Disziplinarstrafen verhängt, weil sie in Gutachten Folterspuren vertuscht hatte.

Die strengeren Vorschriften bezüglich der Polizeihaft haben die Praxis der Folter zwar nicht verhindert, aber dazu beigetragen, dass in letzter Zeit vorrangig Foltermethoden angewandt werden, die keine längerfristig nachweisbaren physischen Spuren hinterlassen. Methoden wie Bastonade, Aufhängen an den Armen und Elektroschocks kommen deutlich seltener zur Anwendung, verbreitet sind dagegen Schläge, Abspritzen mit kaltem Wasser unter Hochdruck, sexuelle Misshandlungen und Demütigungen, Drohungen mit Tod oder Vergewaltigung, Zwang zum langen Verharren in schmerzhaften Körperpositionen sowie Schlaf- und Nahrungsentzug.

Umgangen werden die Vorschriften auch durch zunehmend dokumentierte unregistrierte Festnahmen. Die Menschenrechtsstiftung der Türkei (TIHV) hat in ihrer Jahresstatistik für 2004 angegeben, dass von den 922 Antragstellern auf Behandlung 56 % erklärten, außerhalb regulärer Haft gefoltert worden zu sein [6] .

Neben dem neuen Strafgesetzbuch ist zum 1.6.2005 auch eine neue Strafprozessordnung in Kraft getreten, mit der mehrere zuvor eingeführte Verbesserungen des Schutzes von Festgenommenen rückgängig gemacht wurden. So muss, wer ohne richterliche Anordnung festgenommen wurde, nicht mehr sofort einem Staatsanwalt vorgeführt werden. Anwälten kann, wenn sie wegen bestimmter tStGB-Artikel strafrechtlich verfolgt werden oder deshalb gegen sie ermittelt wird, gem. Art. 151 tStPO n. F. verboten werden, ihre Klienten bei bestimmten Anklagepunkten zu vertreten oder diese in Haft aufzusuchen. Unter diesen tStGB-Artikeln sind auch die Nachfolgeartikel von Artt. 159, 169, 312 tStGB a. F. und Art. 7 ATG, die besonders häufig angewandt wurden, um Menschenrechtsaktivisten mit offensichtlich unbegründeten Anklagen in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Schließlich ist Art. 7 tStPO a. F. [7] entfernt worden, der vorschrieb, dass Ermittlungen und Anklagen bei Folter und Misshandlung prioritär zu behandeln seien und dass in derartigen Prozessen die Frist zwischen Verhandlungsterminen nicht mehr als 30 Tage betragen darf und die Verfahren auch während der Gerichtsferien fortgesetzt werden müssen. Diese Regelung war eine Reaktion darauf, dass Verfahren gegen mutmaßliche Folterer oft verschleppt und verzögert wurden, sodass viele Prozesse aufgrund der in der Türkei geltenden Verjährungsfristen auch bei laufendem Verfahren ohne Verurteilung zum Erliegen kamen. Auch die genannten Bestimmungen hatten dieses Problem nicht zufriedenstellend gelöst, jetzt gibt es jedoch überhaupt keine Regelungen mehr, um der gezielten Prozessverschleppung einen Riegel vorzuschieben.

All diese Faktoren tragen weiterhin zur weitgehenden Straflosigkeit von Folterern bei. Die Staatsanwälte ermitteln praktisch nie von sich aus, wenn sie, z. B. in Gerichtsverhandlungen, von Foltervorwürfen hören. Wenn von Betroffenen Anzeige wegen Folter erstattet wird, werden die Vorwürfe nicht adäquat und unparteiisch untersucht, und es ist schon schwierig, die Eröffnung eines Verfahrens zu erreichen. In einem hohen Prozentsatz von Klagen über Folter und Misshandlung, in denen Staatsanwälte entschieden haben, kein Verfahren einzuleiten, fand offenbar nur eine kurze Untersuchung statt, die sich gewöhnlich auf die Prüfung des Arztberichtes beschränkte. Schon das Europäische Antifolterkomitee hatte diese Praxis kritisiert. Die Problematik liegt darin, dass die während der Polizeihaft vorgeschriebenen ärztlichen Untersuchungen in vielen Fällen im Beisein der begleitenden Polizisten durchgeführt werden. Dies führt dazu, dass die Festgenommenen oftmals nicht ernsthaft untersucht werden und Angst haben, über erlittene Folter zu berichten. Ärzte werden von den Polizisten immer wieder unter Druck gesetzt, Folterspuren nicht zu dokumentieren. Andere Beweismittel wie z. B. Zeugenaussagen von Mitgefangenen werden von den Gerichten in der Regel ignoriert.

Die Angehörigen der Sicherheitskräfte bleiben auch bei einer Anklage wegen schwerwiegender Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Dienst, sogar dann, wenn Gerichtsverfahren gegen sie eingeleitet wurden. Polizeibeamte, die schwerer Menschenrechtsverletzungen wie „Verschwindenlassen“, außergerichtlicher Hinrichtung und Folter und Misshandlung angeklagt sind, wurden oft an andere Dienststellen versetzt und manchmal sogar befördert.

Wenn es überhaupt zur Verurteilung von Folterern kommt, sind die Urteile in der Regel der Schwere der Straftat nicht angemessen. Während die Opfer schwere Verletzungen erlitten, erhalten die Polizisten in der Regel nur minimale Strafen, die oft noch reduziert und/oder ausgesetzt werden – z. B. wegen guter Führung vor Gericht. Nur selten müssen Haftstrafen tatsächlich verbüßt werden. Wie gering auch das Interesse der Regierung an einer Aufklärung von Folterfällen ist, zeigt die Tatsache, dass der der Beteiligung an der Folterung von vier Personen im Jahr 2002 angeklagte Polizist Hanefi Karal nach Berichten seiner Anwälte zu dem Gerichtstermin am 29.06.2005 in Ankara nicht kommen konnte, weil er im Amt des Ministerpräsidenten Dienst tue [8] .

Auch wenn es inzwischen zahlreiche Beispiele gibt, in denen Angeklagte freigesprochen wurden, da keine anderen Beweismittel als unter Druck erlangte Geständnisse vorlagen, ist die Verwendung von unter Folter erpressten Aussagen oder Geständnissen nach Aussagen von Rechtsanwälten in der Türkei nach wie vor weit verbreitet,

Beispielsweise wurde Servet Özgün am 9.6.2005 vom Gericht für schwere Straftaten in Diyarbakir zu lebenslanger Haft nach § 125 tStGB verurteilt. Er hatte sich der Polizei gestellt, nachdem sein Bruder Mehmet Sait Özgün an einem von der PKK verübten Anschlag im Stadtteil Mardinkapı von Diyarbakir beteiligt gewesen und dabei getötet worden war. Servet Özgün war nach eigener Aussage selbst niemals Mitglied der PKK, hat aber unter Folter und Todesdrohungen bei der Polizei eine PKK-Mitgliedschaft und Beteiligung an dem Anschlag gestanden. Aus Angst vor den Drohungen hat er diese Aussage auch bei der ersten Vernehmung durch den Haftrichter bestätigt, in dem Gerichtsverfahren aber erklärt, seine Aussage sei auf Druck der Polizei zustande gekommen und entspreche nicht den Tatsachen. Nach Aussage seiner Rechtsanwältin Meral Danış-Beştaş wurde Servet Özgün ausschließlich aufgrund seiner in dem Verfahren zurückgezogenen Aussage bei der Polizei verurteilt, weitere Beweismittel hätten nicht vorgelegen.

Ein weiteres Beispiel ist das Verfahren gegen den aus Deutschland abgeschobenen Metin Kaplan. Ein wesentlicher Pfeiler der Anklage gegen ihn sind belastende Aussagen von ehemaligen Anhängern seiner Organisation, die selbst erklären, sie hätten diese Aussagen unter Folter gemacht. Über die erlittene Folter liegen in diesen Fällen auch ärztliche Atteste vor. Die Anwälte von Metin Kaplan haben in der Verhandlung vor dem Schwurgericht Istanbul am 4.4.2005 auf diesen Umstand hingewiesen, die ärztlichen Atteste vorgelegt und beantragt, die Belastungszeugen durch das Gericht anzuhören. Dieser Antrag wurde von dem Gericht zurückgewiesen mit der Begründung, die genannten Personen seien rechtskräftig verurteilt und ihre erneute Vernehmung würde keine neuen Erkenntnisse bringen.

Zur Gefahr der Folter nach Abschiebung: Während in den vergangen Jahren – bis ca. 2000 – mehrfach Kurden, selbst wenn sie nur auf sehr niedrigem Niveau politisch aktiv gewesen waren, nach ihrer Abschiebung in die Türkei festgenommen und gefoltert wurden, sind derartige Fälle in den letzten Jahren nicht mehr bekannt geworden. Im Falle von Personen, die von den türkischen Behörden verdächtigt werden, Mitglieder militanter politischer Organisationen zu sein, geht amnesty international aber nach wie vor von einer erheblichen Foltergefahr aus, vor allem wenn bei ihnen Kenntnisse über Organisationsstrukturen im Ausland oder in der Türkei vermutet werden. amnesty ist der Fall eines Kurden bekannt, der nach seiner Abschiebung im August 2004 drei Nächte lang in der Antiterrorabteilung der Polizei in Istanbul gefoltert und anschließend für drei Monate (bis zur ersten Gerichtsverhandlung) inhaftiert wurde, weil er der Verantwortung für einen Anschlag der PKK bezichtigt wurde – obwohl er in der gleichen Sache vor seiner Flucht nach Deutschland vom Gericht freigesprochen worden war."

Document(s): Open document

25.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Torture and illtreatment ("Annual Report 2005") [#32304],  [ID 14013]

"Neu eingeführte Haftbestimmungen, welche inhaftierten Personen einen verbesserten Schutz boten, führten offenbar zu einem Rückgang bestimmter Folterpraktiken, darunter das Aufhängen an den Armen und Schläge auf die Fußsohlen (falaka). Die neuen Bestimmungen wurden jedoch nicht in vollem Umfang umgesetzt, sodass Folterungen und Misshandlungen im Gewahrsam der Polizei und der Gendarmerie nach wie vor Anlass zu großer Sorge gaben. So wurden nach vorliegenden Meldungen Gefangene weiterhin mit Schlägen traktiert, Elektroschocks unterworfen, nackt ausgezogen und mit dem Tode bedroht.

Verbreitet wurde auch von Foltermethoden berichtet, die keine bleibenden körperlichen Spuren hinterlassen. Dazu zählten Schlafentzug und die Verweigerung von Wasser und Nahrung. Außerdem sollen Häftlinge gezwungen worden sein, über lange Zeiträume hinweg stehend in unbequemen Körperpositionen zu verharren. Das Innenministerium hatte alle diese Praktiken in einem Rundschreiben verboten. Dem Vernehmen nach wurden Personen auch weiterhin bei der Festnahme, in Polizeifahrzeugen oder während des Verhörs an abgelegenen Orten mit Schlägen traktiert.

Derya Aksakal wurde am 3. März Berichten zufolge in einen Kleinbus gezerrt, als sie in Istanbul zu Fuß unterwegs war. Man verband ihr nach eigenen Angaben die Augen, und sie wurde von drei maskierten Männern zu ihren politischen Aktivitäten befragt. Einen von ihnen konnte Derya Aksakal dennoch als einen ihr bekannten Polizeibeamten identifizieren. Die Männer sollen Zigaretten auf ihrem Körper ausgedrückt, ihr mit Vergewaltigung gedroht und sie einer Scheinhinrichtung unterzogen haben, bevor sie die Frau nach zwei Stunden wieder auf freien Fuß setzten.

Aydın Ay wurde am 27. Oktober wegen Diebstahlverdachts zur Polizeistation von Carşı in Trabzon gebracht. Nach seinen Schilderungen hat man ihn dort nackt ausgezogen, mit Elektroschocks gepeinigt und seine Hoden gequetscht, um ihn zu zwingen, Dokumente unbekannten Inhalts zu unterschreiben.

Ein großer Teil der Beschwerden über Misshandlungen galten dem exzessiven Gewalteinsatz der Sicherheitskräfte bei Demonstrationen. Ungeachtet eines Rundschreibens des Innenministeriums, das die Beamten anwies, keine unverhältnismäßige Gewalt anzuwenden, trafen weiterhin Berichte ein, denen zufolge Teilnehmer an Protestkundgebungen sogar noch nach der Festnahme geschlagen oder mit Pfefferspray besprüht worden sind."

Document(s): Open document
Open document

19.05.2005 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Torture, ill-treatment, police misconduct ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Europe, Central Asia and North America, Report 2005 (Events of 2004)") [#32120],  [ID 14014]

"In 2004, the government further improved the legislation and regulations concerning detention conditions and the rights of detainees, in connection with the EU accession process. While the Turkish government and the European Commission asserted that torture was not systematic in Turkey anymore, it was still widespread and the government extended immunity to the police and gendarmerie accused of torture.

Turkish human rights organizations stated that the safeguards provided by the government were not always respected in practice by the security forces. Torture and ill-treatment occurred particularly in the southeast, but disadvantaged groups including the Roma and children in the poorer sections of bigger cities, including IDP children, were particularly vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment. Political detainees still risked torture and ill-treatment.

In 2004, over 5,800 persons were detained for “terrorist” crimes. The government declared a “zero-tolerance” policy on torture, but rejected any debate with human rights organizations on the issue, and reacted negatively to arguments and initiatives by these organizations.

Neither government nor NGO statistics are adequate to determine the frequency of torture in Turkey. While increased activity and visibility by the HRA and HRFT as well as better public awareness has resulted in better reporting of torture in recent years, it is believed that the most vulnerable groups are often discouraged from reporting torture, including by fear of retaliation. The HRA recorded 1,040 torture and ill-treatment complaints under detention, compared to 1,202 in 2003, while according to the government, the prosecutors launched cases against 2,395 security officers charged with torture and ill-treatment. In at least ten cases, prosecutors did not launch cases against the officers despite HRA efforts.

The new Penal Code increased the sentences for torture and ill-treatment, and the new regulations reinforced the safeguards against incommunicado detention. However, the HRA observed that most detainees were not able to access attorneys during pre-trial detention, and that the system of forensic examination of detainees before and after detention was not adequately working. The HRA observations were supported in a report by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) published in June 2004. In addition, prosecutors and judges were still generally protective of the officers accused of torture and ill-treatment. While confessions extracted under torture still led to indictment and even conviction, torture allegations did not always lead to effective action by the judiciary."

Document(s): Open document

18.05.2005 - Source: Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe

Law forsees stricter punishment against torturers - execution often fails ("Zur aktuellen Situation - Mai 2005 ") [#32420],  [ID 14015]

"... So sind deutlich härtere Strafe für Folterer vorgesehen. Da gegenwärtig noch viele Verfahren gegen mutmassliche Folterer mit Freispruch oder sehr milden Strafen enden oder die Verfahren ganz einfach verschleppt werden, ist abzuwarten, wie sich das neue Gesetz in der Praxis auswirken wird. Die Verschleppung der Prozesse führt in einigen Fällen dazu, dass die Verfahren eingestellt werden, weil die Zeitdauer für die Verfahren überschritten ist. Folterer bleiben straffrei. Diese Praxis dauert bis heute an."

Document(s): Open document

22.04.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

4 police officers acquitted of torture and rape of 2 teenage girls after massively delayed and grossly inadequate investigation and trial ("Justice denied to tortured teenage girls") [#31511],  [ID 14016]

Document(s): Open document

21.04.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Increasing risk that charges against police officers accused of torture and rape of 2 teenagers in detention will be dropped because of repeated delays in trial ("Protecting the torturers?") [#31484],  [ID 14017]

Document(s): Open document

03.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Torture and ill-treatment ("Anliegen in Europa und Zentralasien Juli-Dezember 2004: Türkei") [#32532],  [ID 14018]

"Einer der Gründe für die dringende Notwendigkeit von unabhängiger Beobachtung und Untersuchungsmechanismen wurde durch die Furore illustriert, die nach dem Besuch des damaligen EU-Erweiterungskommissars Günter Verheugen im September 2004 in der Türkei ausbrach. Es ging dabei um das Ausmaß von Folter in der Türkei und ob sie “systematisch” war oder nicht. Die von der Regierung als Beleg für eine Verbesserung der Situation zitierten Daten umfassten Klagen über Vorfälle von Folter und Misshandlung, welche die Menschenrechtskommissionen in den Provinzen und Kreisen erhalten hatten und die im Vergleich zu den von unabhängigen Menschenrechtsorganisationen gesammelten Zahlen sehr niedrig waren. Dennoch behauptete Ministerpräsident Tayyip Erdoğan bei einer Rede im Oktober 2004 zum Thema Folter in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarats kategorisch, dass es keine systematische Folter gebe. Er fuhr fort: “Jedoch diejenigen, die eine ideologische Einstellung haben, die sagen, dass es immer noch diese Art von Folter gibt, [...] das stammt von Leuten, die Beziehung zu Terrororganisationen haben. Ich möchte Ihnen dies zu Ihrer ausdrücklichen Information sagen.” Das Versäumnis der Regierung, das Ausmaß von Folter ausreichend zu untersuchen, lässt jede ihrer diesbezüglichen Behauptungen ohnehin zweifelhaft erscheinen. Der gegenstandslose Kommentar, der auf unabhängige Menschenrechtsgruppen abzielt, stellt jedoch darüber hinaus einen klaren Bruch der Verpflichtung der Türkei hinsichtlich der Erklärung der Vereinten Nationen über Menschenrechtsverteidiger dar.

Dennoch führten die Haftvorschriften, die aufgrund der Politik der Regierung für “Null Toleranz gegen Folter” besseren Schutz für Festgenommene bieten, zu einer erkennbaren Abnahme der Anwendung von solchen Foltermethoden wie Aufhängen an den Armen und der Falaka. Allerdings wurden diese Vorschriften wie das Recht auf einen Rechtsbeistand oft nicht angewendet und Fälle von Folter und Misshandlung von Personen im Gewahrsam der Polizei oder Gendarmerie blieben weiter ein ernsthaftes Problem.


Über Foltermethoden, die keine Spuren hinterlassen, wurde verbreitet berichtet. Trotz eines Rundschreibens des Innenministers, der das Verbot der Anwendung von Techniken wie Verweigerung von Essen, Schlaf und Toilettengang sowie den Zwang, in unbequemen Positionen zu stehen, darstellte, gab es weiterhin Berichte über derartige Praktiken. Darüber hinaus wurden Missbräuche auch außerhalb offizieller Haftorte durchgeführt. Dies beinhaltete Schläge und andere Misshandlungen von Personen während der Festnahme. Ferner kam es zu Entführungen, bei denen Personen in einem Fahrzeug herumgefahren oder an einem einsamen Ort zum Verhör gebracht wurden, ohne dass über diese Festnahmen irgendwelche Aufzeichnungen angefertigt wurden.

Ein großer Anteil der Beschwerden über Misshandlung stand in Zusammenhang mit dem Einsatz unverhältnismäßiger Gewalt durch die Sicherheitskräfte bei der Überwachung von Demonstrationen, darunter Schläge mit Knüppeln, der Gebrauch von Pfeffergas sowie der Einsatz von Hunden. Trotz eines Rundschreibens des Innenministers mit der Forderung, die Polizisten sollten sicherstellen, dass keine unverhältnismäßige Gewalt angewendet werde, gab es weiterhin Berichte über solche Vorfälle. Beispielhaft seien diesbezüglich die Demonstrationen, die in vielen Städten in der Türkei gegen die Nato-Konferenz in Istanbul vom 28.-29. Juni 2004 stattfanden, und gegen den Rat für Höhere Bildung am 6. November 2004 genannt. Diese Beschwerden wurden oft mit Gegenvorwürfen gegen die Beschwerdeführer wegen “Widerstands gegen einen Beamten mit Gewalt oder Drohungen” oder Verletzung des Gesetzes Nr. 2911 über Veranstaltungen oder Demonstrationen beantwortet."

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Human rights organisation reports 918 credible cases of torture and mistreatment ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29519],  [ID 14019]

"According to the HRF, there were 918 credible cases of torture and mistreatment reported at its 5 national treatment centers during the year. Human rights advocates claimed that hundreds of detainees were tortured during the year in the southeast, where the problem was particularly serious, but that only a small percentage of detainees reported torture and ill-treatment because they feared retaliation or believed that complaining was futile.

During the year, senior HRF and HRA officials stated that there had not been a significant change in the frequency of torture over previous years. However, officials at a number of HRA branch offices, including in the southeast, said they had observed a decline in the practice. A number of attorneys in the southeast and other regions also reported that torture and ill-treatment had become significantly less common. Observers reported that police demonstrated greater restraint in their treatment of detainees and protestors during the year due to legal reforms and government directives."

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Methods of torture ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29519],  [ID 14020]

"Human rights observers said that, because of reduced detention periods, security officials mainly used torture methods that did not leave physical traces, including repeated slapping, exposure to cold, stripping and blindfolding, food and sleep deprivation, threats to detainees or family members, dripping water on the head, squeezing of the testicles, and mock executions. They reported a continued reduction, compared with past years, in the use of methods such as electric shocks, high-pressure cold water hoses, beatings on the soles of the feet (falaka) and genitalia, hanging by the arms, and burns.

The HRA reported that women detainees were sometimes subject to rape, including vaginal and anal rape with truncheons, and sexual harassment. Female detainees sometimes faced sexual humiliation and, less frequently, more severe forms of sexual torture. After being forced to strip in front of male officers, female detainees were sometimes touched, insulted, and threatened with rape.

Human rights attorneys and physicians who treated victims said torture generally occurred during police or Jandarma detention before detainees appeared in court. Because arresting officers were responsible for interrogating suspects, they sometimes used torture to obtain a confession that would justify the arrest.

Treatment of those arrested for ordinary crimes reportedly differed from treatment of those arrested for political crimes. Observers said that security officials sometimes tortured political detainees to intimidate them and send a warning to others with similar political views."

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Rarity of convictions and generally light sentences in torture cases contradicted the Government's official policy of zero tolerance for torture ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29519],  [ID 14021]

"During the year, prosecutors opened trials against 2,395 security personnel on torture or ill-treatment charges. Through September, courts reached final verdicts in 625 torture and ill-treatment cases begun in previous years, convicting 345 defendants and acquitting 1,094. Seven security officers received short suspensions from duty during the year for ill-treatment.

Courts investigated many allegations of ill-treatment and torture by security forces; however, they rarely convicted or punished offenders. When courts did convict offenders, punishment generally was minimal; monetary fines did not keep pace with the rate of inflation, and sentences were sometimes suspended. The rarity of convictions and generally light sentences in torture cases contradicted the Government's official policy of zero tolerance for torture. Authorities typically also allowed officers accused of abuse to remain on duty and, in some cases, promoted them during their trial, which often took years.

Administrative and bureaucratic barriers impeded prosecutions and contributed to the low number of torture convictions. Under the law, courts could not convict unless a defendant attended at least one trial session. Police defendants sometimes failed to attend hearings in order to avoid conviction; prosecuting attorneys claimed courts failed to make serious attempts to locate such defendants, even in cases where the defendants received salary or pension checks at their home address.

In separate decisions in March and September, an Ankara court convicted five police defendants in the 1991 Birtan Altinbas death-in-detention case and sentenced them each to 4 years and 5 months in prison. The court acquitted five codefendants. In November, the High Court of Appeals overturned the verdict on the grounds that the sentences were too lenient, sending the case back to the lower court."

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

New Penal Code provides increased punishment for torture ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29519],  [ID 14022]

"In September, Parliament adopted a new Penal Code that provides increased punishment for torture. Under the new law, the sentence for most torture convictions is 3 to 12 years in prison. Previously, the maximum penalty was 8 years per victim, and most persons sentenced to jail terms received 2 years. The new Code also establishes higher penalties, including life imprisonment, for aggravated torture, and prison terms of up to 3 years for police who fail to report torture. The new Penal Code increases the maximum statute of limitations for torture cases and other felonies from 15 years to 30 years and allows for the statute to be suspended in certain circumstances. The law requires that trials, including appeals, be completed before the statute of limitations expires; otherwise, the trial ends without a verdict. The extension of the statute of limitations was expected to make it difficult for defendants in torture cases to avoid a verdict by delaying court proceedings."

Document(s): Open document

14.01.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Torture Prevention Group which provides legal aid to the victims of torture, closed by Izmir Bar Association; the closure appears to be in violation with Turkish Law on Legal Practice ("Closure of Torture Prevention Group shocking") [#28287],  [ID 14023]

Document(s): Open document

17.12.2004 - Source: Amnesty International

Risk upon return for alleged member of PKK/Kongra-Gel; investigations by Turkish authorities very likely because of criminal conviction in Germany and because of press reports; on state of legal reforms, occurrence of torture still widespread in police custody (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 17.12.2004 an VG Hamburg - 11 A 2003/99 -") [#28799],  [ID 14024]

Document(s): Open document

06.10.2004 - Source: European Commission

Measures for prevention of torture and ill-treatment ("Regular Report 2004 on Turkey´s progress towards accession") [#26161],  [ID 14025]

"With regard to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment, most of the legislative and administrative framework required to combat torture and ill-treatment has been put in place since 2002, when the government declared its intention to pursue a zero-tolerance policy against torture. In accordance with various legislative amendments, pre-trial detention procedures have been aligned with European standards; sentences for torture and ill-treatment can no longer be suspended or converted into fines; and the requirement to obtain permission from superiors to open investigations against public officials has been lifted. Although many of the recommendations of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Ill-treatment (CPT) and the relevant UN bodies have been acted upon, a number have still not been followed up by the Turkish authorities. Turkey still needs to pursue vigorously its efforts to combat torture and other forms of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials.

Recent measures include a further amendment to the Regulation on Apprehension, Detention and Statement Taking in January 2004, which strengthened the rights of detainees. Medical examinations of detained persons are now to be carried out without the presence of the security forces, except when the doctor requires otherwise and the custody register and the suspects’ rights form were improved. In October 2003 the Council of State clarified that detainees’ medical examination reports should not be copied to law enforcement officers. In April 2004 the Turkish Medical Association issued a guideline stating that disciplinary penalties should be brought against doctors who discriminate on the basis of gender, race, nationality, or for any other reason, during medical checks and treatment. Pocket-sized cards setting out a suspect’s rights, including his right to see a lawyer, have been distributed to police officers, who have been instructed to read the rights to a suspect immediately upon arrest. Enlarged versions of the cards have been displayed in police stations. The card also reminds police officers that breaching a suspect’s rights makes them liable for the financial compensation due. The new Penal Code increases sentences for perpetrators of torture and foresees life imprisonment in cases where the victim has died.

An April 2004 circular calls on all law enforcement officials to avoid methods that may engender allegations of ill-treatment of detained persons, such as sleep deprivation, prolonged standing and threats and blindfolding. In October 2003, a circular was issued instructing public prosecutors to carry out, in person, investigations regarding allegations of torture and ill-treatment, which should be considered as priority cases. The amendment to the Military Criminal Code and the Law on the Establishment and Trial Procedures of Military Courts in January 2004 aligned the detention procedures of the military courts with those of other courts.

The Government’s policy of zero tolerance and its serious efforts to implement the legislative reforms have led to a decline in instances of torture. In the first six months of 2004 the Turkish Human Rights Association received 692 complaints related to torture, a 29% decrease on the first six months of 2003. However, the number of complaints of torture outside of formal detention centres has increased considerably as compared with 2003. Of the total human rights violations claims received by the Human Rights Presidency between January and June 2004, a significant proportion related to “torture and ill-treatment”, indicating that such practice remains a problem."

Document(s): Open document

06.10.2004 - Source: European Commission

Fight against impunity in cases of torture ("Regular Report 2004 on Turkey´s progress towards accession") [#26161],  [ID 14026]

"As regards the fight against impunity, according to official statistics, of 2 454 law enforcement agents who were tried in 2003 in relation to allegations of torture or illtreatment, 1 357 were acquitted and of the 854 defendants that were convicted, 138 were imprisoned. In February 2004, the Minister of the Interior issued a circular aimed at ensuring the attendance of the accused at trials concerning torture or ill-treatment. In some cases, defendants had been able to avoid attending trial for many years, thus causing their cases to exceed the statute of limitation. Concerns remain that despite reforms prosecutors are not always promptly and adequately conducting investigations against public officials accused of torture.

In July 2004 the Court of Cassation overruled a judgement concerning the prison sentence given in 2002 to four policemen found guilty of torture on the grounds that the sanction (11 months and 20 days suspended prison sentence) did not adequately reflect the gravity of the offence. Further to this decision a retrial of these policemen will take place."

Document(s): Open document

06.10.2004 - Source: European Commission

Government is seriously pursuing policy of zero tolerance against torture; however, numerous cases of ill-treatment including torture still continue to occur ("Regular Report 2004 on Turkey´s progress towards accession") [#26161],  [ID 14027]

"Following allegations of “systematic” torture in Turkey the Commission undertook a fact finding mission in September 2004 in order to carry out a further check on the situation vis-à-vis torture and ill-treatment in Turkey. This mission enabled the Commission to confirm that the Government is seriously pursuing its policy of zero tolerance in the fight against torture; however, numerous cases of ill-treatment including torture still continue to occur and further efforts will be required to eradicate such practices. The Turkish authorities could further tackle this problem through the establishment of a system of independent monitoring of detention facilities, in line with the recommendations of the UN and the CPT."

Document(s): Open document

06.10.2004 - Source: European Commission

Considerable improvement in detention facilities and in treatment of people in custody ("Regular Report 2004 on Turkey´s progress towards accession") [#26161],  [ID 14028]

"In March 2004 the CPT published its report, together with the response of the Turkish Government, following its field visits to the South and Southeast of Turkey in September 2003. The report notes a considerable improvement in detention facilities and in the treatment of people in custody. The use of torture methods such as suspension by the arms and electric shocks is now very rare, although in some police headquarters such methods were reported. Less detectable methods of torture or ill-treatment still occur.

Notwithstanding the January 2004 Regulation, there are still reports of detainees being seen by a doctor in the presence of enforcement officials without the prior request of the doctor. Moreover, the requirement to transmit the medical report to the authorities concerned, without providing copies to law enforcement officials, is also not always met.

In order to help address a lack of forensic experts trained in detecting torture and illtreatment, a project is currently underway to train 2 500 doctors who work in the western part of Turkey. The training is in accordance with the Forensic Medicine Institution’s “Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment” and the Istanbul Protocol. In order to improve the quality of medical examinations, the Forensic Medicine Institute has started to move forensic medicine examination rooms from courthouses to hospitals and health centres."

Document(s): Open document

04.10.2004 - Kaya, Serafettin

Ongoing arrests and convictions of alleged supporters or members of PKK/KADEK; ongoing systematic use of torture during interrogations; claimant likely to be a suspect in spite of an acquittal in an earlier trial (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 4.10.2004 an VG Gelsenkirchen - 14a K 6220/03.A -") [#27464],  [ID 14029]

Document(s): Open document

25.09.2004 - Oberdiek, Helmut

On demonstrations in Mersin in early 2002 supporting PKK/Kadek and on occasion of Newroz-holiday respectively; possible risk due to an incriminating statement by a friend, even if the claimant has not taken part in many activities referred to here; torture is still a routine method for interrogations (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 25.9.2004 an VG Arnsberg - 11 K 4259/02.A -") [#27457],  [ID 14030]

Document(s): Open document

22.07.2004 - Source: Bianet

692 people tortured in first half of 2004, according to Human Rights Association (IHD) ("692 People Tortured in The First Half of 2004") [#24550],  [ID 14031]

Document(s): Open document

20.07.2004 - Source: Amnesty International

4 men detained by police allegedly on suspicion of "aiding and abetting an armed organization", presumed to be the illegal armed group Kongra-Gel (formerly known as the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK))/ they are at risk of torture in police custody ("Turkey - UA 227/04") [#24137],  [ID 14032]

Document(s): Open document
Open document

07.07.2004 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Women at particular risk of being subjected to sexual torture ("Violence Against Women - 10 reports - year 2003") [#24621],  [ID 14033]

"Women in Turkey are particularly at risk of being subjected to sexual torture. Forms of torture inflicted upon women include electro-shocks to the genitals, standing for long periods of time, being forced to strip and stand naked in front of male guards, forced virginity tests, beatings targeting the genitals and breasts, use of high-pressure water hoses, and sexual abuse including rape and threats of rape. Moreover, threats of rape are often compounded by police taunts that rape will deprive women of their virginity and their honour.
These kinds of torture and ill-treatment of women are part of the broader context of widespread and systematic use of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by the police and gendarmes in Turkey. [...]"

Document(s): Introduction and Contents
Cover Turkey

07.07.2004 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Reports of increasing use of sophisticated methods of torture designed to evade detection ("Violence Against Women - 10 reports - year 2003") [#24621],  [ID 14034]

"OMCT is especially alarmed by reports that Turkish authorities are increasingly using sophisticated methods of torture designed to evade detection by forensic medical examination and other investigative techniques. 83 Turkish authorities continue to intimidate both detainees and medical health professionals not to report evidence of torture and medical examinations of detainees do not always occur outside the presence of law enforcement officials as mandated by regulation. The situation in the eastern part of the country appears to be especially poor. The CPT received numerous reports of detainees who were warned not to report mistreatment to examining physicians and it appears that the presence of law enforcement officials during medical exams is routine."

Document(s): Introduction and Contents
Cover Turkey

07.07.2004 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Allegations of torture rarely investigated or prosecuted ("Violence Against Women - 10 reports - year 2003") [#24621],  [ID 14035]

"Turkish authorities are not making good faith efforts to curb human rights violations using existing legal deterrents. Indeed, figures show that allegations of torture are rarely investigated or prosecuted. [...] In addition, courts have shown extreme reluctance to compel the appearance of public servants, such as police officers and gendarmes for trial and consequently, the few cases that are prosecuted are subject to lengthy delays and frequently dismissed for exceeding the statute of limitations. During the lengthy pendancy of proceedings suspects are rarely suspended from service in the police force or gendarmerie, but rather are allowed to continue exercising their duties and in some cases even promoted.
Despite the enhanced maximum sentences for the crimes of torture (Article 243) and ill-treatment (Article 245) described above, most prosecutions result in sentences at the lower end of the sentencing scale which, incidentally, remained unchanged by the recent legislative amendments, and therefore involve light sentences which are frequently suspended or converted into fines. Moreover, figures show that most cases are prosecuted under Article 245 for ill-treatment rather than Article 243 relating to torture which carries more severe penalties. These prosecutorial practices appear to contravene the clear intent of the legislature which was to enhance the deterrent effect of the law."

Document(s): Introduction and Contents
Cover Turkey

07.07.2004 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Continued systematic use of torture despite efforts to satisfy EU human rights criteria ("Violence Against Women - 10 reports - year 2003") [#24621],  [ID 14036]

"In an effort to satisfy EU human rights criteria for accession, Turkey adopted constitutional amendments on October 4, 2001 and three legislative reform packages in February, March and August 2002, Acts No. 4744, 4748 and 4771, addressing several human rights issues including capital punishment, pre-trial detention, access to counsel and notification of next of kin when someone is placed in custody. [...]
In May 2002, a regulation was adopted forbidding the blindfolding of detainees in police custody. In June 2002, in response to criticisms by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, the Director General for Security issued a circular prohibiting the projection of light into the face of suspects during interrogation and providing that interrogation rooms may no longer be painted black. The circular also called on all officials to be vigilant against torture. In August 2002, the legislature provided for the possibility of retrial for criminal and civil cases to comply with the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). This law, however, was formulated to apply only to cases filed with the ECtHR after August 2003. The legislature also amended Article 13 of the Civil Servants Law rendering public officials found guilty of torture or ill-treatment personally liable to pay compensation set by the judgments of the ECtHR. [...]
OMCT welcomes the legal reforms described above but remains extremely concerned about the continuing systematic use of torture in Turkey and the lack of good faith and due diligence on the part of Turkish law enforcement authorities in the implementation of these reforms. The Turkish government must do much more in terms of monitoring compliance and training its civil servants. Moreover, some of the Constitutional and statutory amendments do not go far enough in protecting persons from torture, while still others contain implementing provisions which are ambiguous and perpetuate proscribed practices. OMCT also notes with concern that public officials, including prosecutors and police officers are reported to be unaware of recent legal changes and continue to operate under the old rules.
It is of grave concern that Turkish law still does not guarantee immediate access to counsel for detainees under the jurisdiction of the State Security Courts. Over the past few years, United Nations experts, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and others have repeatedly called on Turkey to abolish incommunicado detention at police stations as the single most important step in eradicating torture in Turkey. As described above, the current law still allows for the detention of persons at police stations and gendarmeries for two days without access to lawyers. It is during this period of incommunicado detention that police most frequently torture and mistreat persons in their custody. Moreover the denial of access to counsel for detainees under the jurisdiction of the State Security Courts is reported to have a “knock-on” effect for other detainees, i.e. those arrested for common criminal offences who are also frequently denied their rights to legal assistance. Police officers are reported to threaten these detainees with additional charges for political offences if they attempt to assert their right to assistance of counsel. In many police stations access to counsel is routinely delayed until detainees have given a formal statement, and prosecutors and courts still rely heavily on uncorroborated confessions and “statements” in the prosecution and adjudication of guilt in criminal cases.
In its report on its visit to Turkey from 21 to 27 of March 2002, the CPT confirmed that access to counsel remained a significant problem particularly in the provinces. [...]"

Document(s): Introduction and Contents
Cover Turkey

07.07.2004 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Broadened definition of torture includes torture by civil servants and public employees ("Violence Against Women - 10 reports - year 2003") [#24621],  [ID 14037]

"On August 26, 1999, the Turkish legislature passed Law No 4449 which broadened the definition of torture in Article 243 to include acts of torture by civil servants and public employees carried out for any purpose and increased the penalty for torture from the previous maximum of 5 years to 8 years imprisonment. Article 243 now reads: “A civil servant or other public employee who resorts to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in order to make a person confess a crime, to prevent a victim, plaintiff, somebody participating in a trial or a witness from reporting incidents, to prevent them from filing a formal complaint or because they filed a formal complaint or for any other reason, shall be sentenced to a heavy prison penalty of up to eight years and permanent or temporary disqualification from service.” Law No. 4449 also increased the punishment for illtreatment;
Article 245 of the Penal Code now provides that “those authorized to use force and all police officers who, while performing their duty or executing their superiour’s orders, threaten or treat badly or cause bodily injury to a person or who actually beat or wound a person in circumstances other than prescribed by laws and regulations, shall be punished by imprisonment for three months to five years and shall be temporarily disqualified from the civil service.”
[...] Under Article 238(2) of the Criminal Procedure Law, statements of suspects obtained by means of torture or other ill-treatment at police stations or at the offices of the prosecutors cannot be used as evidence in trials. In 1992, the Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure was amended to provide that torture and ill-treatment constituted “prohibited interrogation methods.”"

Document(s): Introduction and Contents
Cover Turkey

23.06.2004 - Kaya, Serafettin

Stellungnahme vom 23.6.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von H. Oberdiek und O. Aydin im selben Verfahren) ("Stellungnahme vom 23.6.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von H. Oberdiek und O. Aydin im selben Verfahren)") [#26068],  [ID 14038]

Document(s): Open document

18.06.2004 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Report focused on torture and ill treatment by law enforcement officials ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 7 to 15 September 2003 [CPT/Inf(2004) 16]") [#23415],  [ID 14039]

Document(s): Report
Report Government response [CPT/Inf(2004) 17] Government response [CPT/Inf(2004) 17]

20.05.2004 - Aydin, Osman

Stellungnahme vom 20.5.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von H. Oberdiek und S. Kaya im selben Verfahren) ("Stellungnahme vom 20.5.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von H. Oberdiek und S. Kaya im selben Verfahren)") [#26067],  [ID 14041]

Document(s): Open document

19.05.2004 - Source: Amnesty International

Southeast Turkey: 12-year-old and members of her family have reportedly been receiving threats since she lodged a complaint that she had been severely beaten by police officers in Diyarbakir ("Turkey - UA 177/04") [#22579],  [ID 14042]

Document(s): Open document
Open document

25.04.2004 - Oberdiek, Helmut

Stellungnahme vom 25.4.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von S. Kaya und O. Aydin im selben Verfahren) ("Stellungnahme vom 25.4.2004 an VG Greifswald - 9 A 2477/99 As - (vgl. auch Stellungnahmen von S. Kaya und O. Aydin im selben Verfahren)") [#26070],  [ID 14043]

Document(s): Open document

17.04.2004 - Kaya, Serafettin

No improvements concerning legal prosecution of organizations and individuals supporting the Kurdish issue (e.g. DEHAP/HADEP); police stations still have special interrogation rooms for torturing alleged supporters of illegal organizations (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 17.4.2004 an VG Frankfurt/Oder – 3 K 935/99.A –") [#25172],  [ID 14044]

Document(s): Open document

23.03.2004 - Source: UN Human Rights Council (formerly UN Commission on Human Rights)

Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees in police custody are apparently still widespread ("Civil and political rights, including the questions of: Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; Report of the Special Rapporteur, Theo van Boven; Addendum: Summary of information, including individual cases, transmitted to Governments and replies received [E/CN.4/2004/56/Add.1]") [#23236],  [ID 14045]

"1788. The Special Rapporteur considers it appropriate to draw attention to the concerns expressed by the Committee against Torture (CAT/C/CR/30/5, paras. 5 and 6) about numerous and consistent allegations that torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees in police custody are apparently still widespread in Turkey; allegations that persons held in police custody have been denied prompt and adequate access to legal and medical assistance and that family members have not been promptly notified of their detention; allegations that despite the number of complaints, the prosecution and punishment of members of security forces for torture and ill-treatment are rare, proceedings are exceedingly long, sentences are not commensurate with the gravity of the crime, and officers accused of torture are rarely suspended from duty during the investigation; the importance given to confessions in criminal proceedings and the reliance of the police and the judiciary on confessions to E/CN.4/2004/56/Add.1 Page 377 secure convictions; the alarming problems in prisons as a result of the introduction of the so-called “F-type prisons” which have led to hunger strikes causing the deaths of more than 60 inmates; the lack of training of medical personnel dealing with detainees in matters relating to the prohibition of torture; allegations according to which the expulsion of illegal aliens to their country of origin or to neighbouring countries is often accompanied by ill-treatment, in violation of the safeguards contained in article 3 of the Convention; and the continuing reports of harassment and persecution of human rights defenders and non-governmental organizations."

Document(s): Open document

25.02.2004 - Source: US Department of State

Continued cases of torture, beatings, and other abuse by security forces ("Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2003") [#19741],  [ID 14047]

"The Constitution prohibits such practices; however, some members of the security forces continued to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse persons regularly. Leftists and Kurdish rights activists were more likely than others to suffer torture. Despite the Government's cooperation with unscheduled foreign inspection teams, public pledges by successive governments to end the practice, and initiatives to address the problem, widespread reports of torture continued, particularly in the southeast.

HRF estimated there were approximately 920 credible applications by torture victims at its 5 national treatment centers during the year, compared with 965 in 2002. These figures did not necessarily reflect trends in the use of torture. The reports included complaints stemming from previous years' incidents. Human rights advocates claimed that hundreds of detainees were tortured during the year in the southeast, where the problem was particularly serious, but that only 5 to 20 percent reported torture because they feared retaliation or believed that complaining was futile.

In June, Gulbahar Gunduz, member of the DEHAP Women's Wing in Istanbul, said she was tortured and raped by four men identifying themselves as police officers. The case was under investigation at year's end. In April, Ruhsel Demirbas, Ugur Atilgan and Senol Budak held a press conference in Istanbul in which they claimed police beat them, deprived them of sleep, and repeatedly threatened to kill them after arresting them for hanging anti-war placards.

Human rights observers said that, because of reduced detention periods, security officials mostly used torture methods that did not leave physical traces, including repeated slapping; exposure to cold; stripping and blindfolding; food and sleep deprivation; threats to detainees or family members; dripping water on the head; squeezing of the testicles; and mock executions. They reported a significant reduction over past years in methods such as electric shocks, high-pressure cold water hoses, beatings on the soles of the feet (falaka) and genitalia, hanging by the arms, and burns. The Human Rights Association (HRA) reported that women detainees were sometimes subject to rape, including vaginal and anal rape with truncheons, and sexual harassment.

Female detainees sometimes faced sexual humiliation and, less frequently, more severe forms of sexual torture. After being forced to strip in front of male officers, female detainees were sometimes touched, insulted, and threatened with rape.

Human rights attorneys and physicians who treated torture victims said torture generally occurred during police or Jandarma detention before detainees appeared in court. Because the arresting officer was responsible for interrogating a suspect, officers sometimes resorted to torture to obtain a confession that would justify the arrest. In one example, the European Roma Rights Center reported that, in February, police in Edirne beat and tortured with electric shocks a 14-year-old Romani boy suspected of stealing a wallet (see Section 5).

Although the law prohibits evidence obtained under torture from being used in court, in practice prosecutors rarely followed up on detainees' allegations of torture. When prosecutors did follow up on such allegations, the detainee's trial often proceeded, and was sometimes completed, before the start of the torture trial. Treatment of those arrested for ordinary crimes (who were sometimes beaten until they gave a confession) and those arrested for "political" crimes reportedly differed. Observers said that security officials often tortured political detainees to intimidate them and send a warning to people with certain political views.

State-employed doctors administered all medical examinations of detainees. Examinations occurred once during detention and a second time before either arraignment or release; however, the examinations generally were brief and informal. According to the Society of Forensic Medicine Specialists, only approximately 250 of 80,000 doctors in the country were forensic specialists, and most detainees were examined by general practitioners and specialists not qualified to detect signs of torture. Some former detainees asserted that doctors did not conduct proper examinations and that authorities denied their requests for a second examination.

Unlike in past years, the Turkish Medical Association recorded no cases of doctors being harassed, charged with a crime, or reassigned for reporting torture. However, in June, Izmir police raided a Medical Association training seminar in which doctors were being trained in the detection of latent signs of torture. Police told participants they would be investigated, but the Governor canceled the case, according to the Association.

In September, the parliamentary Human Rights Committee reported that doctors in Izmir were signing reports indicating detainees had not been tortured without examining the detainees. The Committee stated that, in some cases, the same detainees were later taken to a hospital where doctors reported signs of torture.

A Justice Ministry regulation requires doctor-patient privacy during the examination of suspects, except in cases where the doctor or suspect requests police presence for security reasons. However, the Society of Forensic Medicine Specialists reported that security officials often remained in the room despite objections, although this occurred less often than in past years. According to the Medical Association and human rights observers, the presence of a security officer could lead physicians to refrain from examining detainees, perform cursory examinations and not report findings, or to report physical findings but not draw reasonable medical inferences that torture occurred. In October, the Council of State annulled a provision requiring that copies of detainees' medical examinations be sent to police authorities.

The law mandates heavy jail sentences and fines for medical personnel who falsify reports to hide torture, those who knowingly used such reports, and those who coerce doctors into making them. The highest penalties are for doctors who supply false reports for money. In practice, there were few prosecutions for violation of these laws. The Medical Association had the authority to levy fines and suspend for up to 6 months the licenses of doctors who falsified reports. However, Association officials said they were unable to enforce these sanctions because most doctors worked at least partly for the Government, which protected the doctors from sanctions.

The investigation, prosecution, and punishment of members of the security forces for torture or other mistreatment was rare, and accused officers usually remained on duty pending a decision, which could take years (see Section 1.d.).

A Prime Ministry directive requires prosecutors to make unscheduled inspections of detention facilities to look for torture and other maltreatment and to report inspection results to the Prime Minister. Although the Ministry of Interior reported that thousands of such inspections took place, human rights advocates and some prosecutors termed the inspections cursory and unlikely to lead to criminal charges against the police.

By the end of October, authorities had initiated judicial proceedings in 8 cases involving torture allegations and 107 involving maltreatment allegations against police (see Section 1.d.). Of these, courts ruled for conviction in one case and for acquittal in two cases. Authorities dropped 64 cases and continued to try 48 cases.

During the year, 93 police officers received administrative punishments, such as short suspensions, for torture or maltreatment.

In September, an Interior Ministry commission dismissed Adil Serdar Sacan as chief of the Organized Crime Department of the Istanbul Security Directorate because of complaints filed against him by alleged torture victims.

In April, an appeals court unanimously upheld the October 2002 Manisa Penal Court conviction of 10 police officers for torture. By July, all of the officers had turned themselves in to authorities. The officers were sentenced to prison terms ranging from 60 to 130 months; according to the Prosecution Law, under which convicts serve a portion of their sentences, they were expected to spend from 24 months to 52 months in prison. The high-profile case involved 16 youths tortured in police detention in 1996.

During the year, the case of five police officers convicted in 2002 for the 1996 torture of nine detainees, including journalists from the leftist newspaper "Atilim," was closed without a verdict when the case, which was being appealed, expired under the statute of limitations.

The trial continued in the case of 10 police officers charged for the death in detention of Birtan Altinbas, who died in police custody in Ankara in 1991. The trial had been subject to repeated procedural delays, including due to the court's inability to locate some of the defendants. The statute of limitations for the charges is scheduled to expire in February 2006, at which time the case will be dropped if there is no verdict.

During the year, the ECHR ruled against the country in one case involving torture and eight cases involving inhuman or degrading treatment.

Police harassed, beat, and abused demonstrators (see section 2.b.).

Due to the conflict with the PKK/KADEK/KHK, the Government continued to organize, arm, and pay a civil defense force of about 60,000, mostly in the southeast region. This force, known as the village guards, was reputed to be the least disciplined of the security forces and continued to be accused repeatedly of drug trafficking, rape, corruption, theft, and human rights abuses. Inadequate oversight and compensation contributed to this problem, and in some cases Jandarma allegedly protected village guards from prosecution. In addition to the village guards, Jandarma and police "special teams" were viewed as those most responsible for abuses. DEHAP officials claimed that security forces in July publicly displayed the bodies of two slain PKK/KADEK militants in the town of Baskale in Van Province. However, the incidence of credible allegations of serious abuses by security forces in operations against the PKK/KADEK/KHK was low.

Prison conditions remained poor. Underfunding and poor administration of penal facilities remained problems. HRF maintained that the Government provided insufficient funding for prison food, resulting in poor-quality meals. According to HRF, food sold at prison shops was too expensive for most inmates, and there was a lack of potable water.

There were reports that prison guards beat children in detention. In September, the parliamentary Human Rights Committee reported that Committee members investigated conditions at the children's ward of Aydin Prison and found that all the children had visible injuries and many claimed to have been tortured. A child held in solitary confinement told the Committee he had requested an isolation cell because some of the children in the ward were raping others.

At year's end, a court decision had not been reached in the case of 38 employees of Bakirkoy Prison for Women and Children who were indicted in December 2002 for mistreating prisoners and official misconduct.

The Government maintained that prisons were staffed with doctors, dentists, psychologists, and teachers, although there were shortages in some areas. According to the Medical Association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists were only available at the largest prisons. Some inmates claimed they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.

Inmates in high-security F-type prisons were permitted to socialize in groups of 10 for up to 5 hours per week. In addition, they were able to participate in communal activities. According to HRF, as of October, one prisoner continued a hunger strike to protest F-type prisons. The Government reported that the President pardoned 172 hunger strikers during the year. Two prisoners on hunger strike died during the year, bringing total deaths to 107 since the start of the strikes in 2000, according to HRF. The Government alleged that terrorist groups forced weaker members to conduct the hunger strikes and threatened family members of those who wanted to quit.

Human rights activists and attorneys for jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan called on the Government to transfer Ocalan from his cell on Imrali Island in the Sea of Marmara to a mainland prison. They claimed Ocalan was being held in isolation and also said he was suffering from health problems. Relatives and attorneys were unable to visit Ocalan for 15 weeks from November 2002 to March; the Government said stormy weather grounded the boat shuttling visitors to the island. The ECHR ruled in March that Ocalan's prison conditions were not unlawful.

The trial against 1,615 persons on duty at Bayrampasi prison during the December 2001 hunger strike was ongoing at year's end. The related trial of 167 prisoners was also ongoing at year's end.

Human rights observers estimated that, at any given time, at least one-quarter of those in prison were awaiting trial or the outcome of their trial. Men and women were held separately. Despite the existence of separate juvenile facilities, at times juveniles and adults were held in adjacent wards with mutual access. According to the Government, detainees and convicts were held either in separate facilities or in separate sections of the same facility.

The Ministry of Justice, the General Directorate of Prisons, and the parliamentary Human Rights Committee regularly inspected prisons and issued reports. Prison Monitoring Boards--five-person visiting committees composed of nongovernmental experts such as doctors and lawyers–-also conducted inspections. The 130 boards conducted 522 visits, prepared 1,638 reports, and made 3,664 recommendations for improvements to the Ministry of Justice. The Government reported that it took action on some of these recommendations, but lacked the funding to respond to others, including those related to crowding and lack of resources for activities. During the year, the 140 special prison judges received 11,923 petitions relating to prison conditions and sentences; they admitted 3,659 petitions, partially admitted 319, and rejected 7,945.

Human rights groups criticized the Government's selection of Monitoring Board representatives. Medical Association officials said the Government did not consult them on Board membership and selected only government-employed doctors for the bodies. The Society of Forensic Medicine Specialists reported that only two forensic specialists served on the Boards. Some bar associations also said that their preferred candidates were not selected.

The Government permitted prison visits by representatives of some international organizations, such as the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT); the CPT visited in February and September, and conducted ongoing consultations with the Government. Requests by the CPT to visit prisons were routinely granted; however, domestic nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) did not have access to prisons."

Document(s): Open document

25.02.2004 - Source: Council of Europe - European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Report on CPT monitoring visit on prison conditions and torture ("Report to the Turkish Government on the visit to Turkey carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 16 to 17 February 2003 [CPT/Inf(2004) 2]") [#19650],  [ID 14048]

Document(s): Report
Report Government response [CPT/Inf(2004) 3] Government response [CPT/Inf(2004) 3]

09.02.2004 - Source: Amnesty International

Risk of torture still high for members of MLKP (Marxist Leninist Communist Party); diplomatic assurances are not sufficient to rule out such risks (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 9.2.2004 an Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Karlsruhe") [#21253],  [ID 14046]

Document(s): Open document

09.02.2004 - Source: Amnesty International

Risk of torture still high for members of MLKP (Marxist Leninist Communist Party); diplomatic assurances are not sufficient to rule out such risks (expert opinion, in German) ("Stellungnahme vom 9.2.2004 an Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Karlsruhe") [#21253],  [ID 14049]

Document(s): Open document

07.11.2003 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Report focused on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in selected Osce states ("Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment") [#17377],  [ID 14050]

"Turkey has been party to CAT since 1 September 1988 and it ratified the CPT on 26 February 1988.

In the past two years, Turkish authorities have been engaged in a major reform in order to bring national legislation up to par with the standards of the European Union. This reform has brought about a number of positive formal changes in the field of human rights, including issues related to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment. The challenge remains, however, to effectively implement these changes in practice. Pending this, torture and ill-treatment in Turkish detention facilities remains a serious problem.

The first and the second “harmonization packages” of February and March 2002 reduced legitimate detention periods. However, for suspects under State Security Court jurisdiction, charged with crimes of a collective, political, or conspiratorial nature, the maximum initial detention period still remained four days at the prosecutor’s discretion. Moreover, it took Turkish legislators until June 2003 to abolish a Criminal Procedure Code provision that denied detainees, held for offences under the jurisdiction of State Security Courts, the right to legal counsel for the first forty-eight hours of their detention. While this was welcomed progress, the time frame of 48 hours is still too long to protect detainees from torture.

In April 2003, the Human Rights Association of Turkey (HRA) stated in its report covering the first three months of the year that it had observed no progress in the prevention of torture. In this period, 183 cases of torture during detention had been reported, and another 33 cases in prisons. The total number of cases of torture or ill-treatment by the police or gendarmerie reported to the HRA (including abuses during house searches, in the streets, etc.) reached 392.

The most commonly used torture techniques in Turkey are beatings, falaka (beating the soles of the feet), electric shocks, hosing with cold water, sexual abuse (including squeezing of the testicles and rape), suspending by the arms or wrists bound behind the victim's back (i.e., the “Palestinian hanger” which causes respiratory failure if the position is held for a long time), and death threats. While reports of torture are rarely received from prisons, it remains a common practice in police and gendarmerie stations. [...]

Women held in custody -- especially if they are of Kurdish origin -- are frequently subjected to rape and other sexual abuse. As Turkish law does not define penetration with objects other than a penis as rape, such practices are carried out with impunity. Another common practice is to strip a victim naked during interrogation, or to subject a woman to sexual violence in the presence of her husband or other family members in order to force the family member to confess. [...]

The January 2003 “harmonization package” included provisions preventing Turkish courts from suspending the prison sentences of those convicted of inflicting torture. The parliament also approved measures stipulating that these prison sentences could no longer be commuted to fines. The amendments incorporated measures obliging the judiciary to hear the statements of defendants and detainees before they reach a verdict on the case before them, as well as provisions detailing that, upon entering and leaving prison, defendants and detainees should be subject to medical examinations about which reports must then be written.

Despite the formal measures taken to prevent torture and ill-treatment, the climate of impunity remains. Prosecutors are reluctant to file charges against alleged torturers, and many torturers who “have not been found” are able to continue their police careers. The burden of proof lies on the victims, and the slow pace of judicial proceedings easily ends up in unresolved cases due to the statute of limitations."

Document(s): Open document

30.09.2003 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Report focused on latest human rights developments in the member states of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) ("Interventions and Recommendations by the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) on the Occasion of the OSCE Human Dimension Implementation Meeting Warsaw, 6-17 October 2003") [#16408],  [ID 14051]

"In Turkey, torture and ill-treatment in prisons and detention facilities remains commonplace. There are numerous reports of beatings, sexual abuse, electric shocks, hosing with cold water and death threats. During the first three months of 2003, 183 cases of torture during detention were reported, and another 33 cases in prisons. Women are frequently subjected to rape and other sexual abuse. One victim reported being detained at Istanbul police headquarters for four days of interrogation in March 2002 without access to legal counsel, during which time she was stripped naked, blindfolded and sprayed with cold water through a water hose forced into her vagina. Another woman reported being detained and interrogated; she was accused of being linked to an illegal organization. During her detention, she was allegedly stripped naked, hosed with cold water and a policeman forced a truncheon into her anus, allegations that were later supported by medical records.

The situation in the so-called F-type prison facilities remained unresolved. The solitary confinement in this type of prisons can, in and of itself, be seen as a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. In addition, the solitary confinement poses an increased threat of increased ill-treatment or torture in the facilities. The amendment of the “Anti-Terror Law” provides for only very limited opportunities for social activities, and fails to adequately protect prisoners from isolation, with the psychological strains it brings with it. Since the introduction of the F-type prison system, hunger strikes against it lead to 104 deaths by the end of 2002.

Developments in the harmonization process in order to accede to the European Union still fall short of EU requirements, according to EU Enlargement Commissioner Guenter Verheugen in March 2003. Since then, on 19 June, an important formal step in combating torture was taken, when the government abolished a criminal procedure code provision that denied detainees held for offences under the jurisdiction of State Security Courts the right to legal counsel for the first forty-eight hours of their detention. While this progress is important, the decision needs to be implemented in practice."

Document(s): Open document

30.07.2003 - Source: International Federation for Human Rights

Report focused on torture and ill treatment, disappearances, extra-judicial executions, displaced persons, prisons, freedom of expression and freedoms of peaceful assembly and association ("Human Rights in the Kurdish Southeast: Alarming situation despite extensive legal reforms") [#14758],  [ID 14052]

Document(s): Open document

21.06.2003 - Source: Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe

Generell weniger Folter; Ausnahme bilden Angehörige der HADEP; beim IHD (Türkischen Menschenrechtsverein) sind 2002 (876) mehr Klagen wegen Folter eingegangen als im Jahr 2001 ("Zur aktuellen Situation - Juni 2003 ") [#14557],  [ID 14053]

"Generell ist zu bemerken, dass Angehörige von legalen Organisationen heute weniger mit kör-perlicher Folter rechnen müssen als früher. Ausnahme bilden Angehörige der HADEP, die weiterhin mit körperlicher Folter rechnen müssen. Psychologische Folter ist zudem weit ver-breitet und aktiven AnhängerInnen der HADEP gegenüber an der Tagesordnung. Anhänge-rInnen von illegalen Organisationen müssen nach wie vor mit systematischer körperlicher Folter rechnen. Die Reduktion der Länge der Incommunicadohaft hat an dieser Praxis nichts verändert, werden die Inhaftierten doch vor allem während der ersten zwei Tage ihrer Haft gefoltert.
Es muss zudem unterstrichen werden, dass es auch im Zusammenhang mit friedlichen Demonstrationen gegen den Krieg oder für die Freilassung von Abdullah Öcalan, oder aber mit der Forderung nach Kurdischunterricht, immer wieder zu Klagen über Folter gekommen ist. So wurden nach einer Demonstration gegen den Krieg in Kadiköy (Istanbul) neun Kinder in Haft genommen und laut Aussagen ihrer Rechtsvertreterin gefoltert. Sie hätten Spuren von Schlägen im Gesicht gehabt.
Beim IHD (Türkischen Menschenrechtsverein) sind 2002 (876) mehr Klagen wegen Folter eingegangen als im Jahre 2001 (862). Auch für die ersten drei Monate des Jahres 2003 stellt der Menschenrechtsverein den türkischen Behörden ein schlechtes Zeugnis aus. Zwi-schen Januar und März konnten im Bereich der Folter keine Fortschritte beobachtet werden. Der IHD hätte in dieser Zeit Klagen von 392 Personen erhalten. Nach den Statistiken des IHD beklagten sich in dieser Zeit 183 Personen über Folter oder Misshandlung während der Haft, 73 Personen über Schläge während Demonstrationen, 33 Personen über Folter oder erniedrigende Behandlung im Gefängnis, 50 Personen über Drohungen und Zwang zu Spit-zeldiensten und 53 Personen über Folter oder Misshandlungen auf der Strasse oder zu Hause."

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2003 - Source: International Federation for Human Rights

Fact finding mission in December 2002/January 2003 shows legal provisions and actions against torture to be insufficient ("International Investigative Mission: Turkey: Torture, still a routine practice.") [#12386],  [ID 14055]

"This report stands as a comment on the report of the Republic of Turkey concerning the implementation of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, ratified by Turkey on August 2nd 1998.
Legislative progress has been undertaken in Turkey in order to comply with EU standards: for example, death penalty was abolished. Named the " Adjustment Package", these changes may be regarded as an important signal of the determination of the Turkish government towards better protection of human rights in the country.
The FIDH welcomes the recent legal reforms which nonetheless remain insufficient. For instance, the definition of torture set out in the Turkish legislation is narrower than the one required by the Convention, whose scope extends to people acting with the support or acquiescence of public officials. Futhermore little has been done to eradicate the practice of torture. Indeed the report indicates that there is no decrease in the infliction of torture compared to previous years in Turkey.
These treatments especially occur to people falling under the jurisdiction of the State Security Court, ie people suspected of political crimes, and particularly, those suspected of being connected to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)- now called Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress (KADEK).
Reported cases of torture of ordinary criminal suspects also occur although the custody period has been shortened. New torture methods are being used that leave no physical signs.
Cases of torture and ill treatment are still very numerous in the Kurdish regions and women often undergo sexual violence.
When it comes to the prevention of torture by the state authorities, the report underlines that although the relevant laws do exist, there are not properly implemented in practice."

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2003 - Source: International Federation for Human Rights

Reported cases of torture and ill-treatment in the Kurdish regions (East and Southeast): ("International Investigative Mission: Turkey: Torture, still a routine practice.") [#12386],  [ID 14056]

"Although armed conflict between government forces and the opposition Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK-KADEK) had virtually ended by 2000, and the State of Emergency (OHAL) in the Kurdish regions was lifted on November 30, 2002, repression of human rights activists, pro-Kurdish political parties and organizations has continued. Local party offices, the Human Rights Association (IHD) and the Turkish Human Rights Foundation's branch offices have been regularly raided, and their officials and supporters have been illegally detained, tortured and have "disappeared". It has been reported that in February 2003, the Turkish government was precisely considering reinstating the State of Emergency Rule in the southeast, namely in the cities of Diyarbakir, Batman, Sirnak, Siirt, Van and Hakkari to "maintain order" in case of a war in Iraq. For the time being, such measures haven't been put into practice; however, there is a concern related to the presence of Turkish military forces at the Iraqi border and its impact on the human rights situation in the southeast region.
In this context, the FIDH is gravely concerned about reported cases of people being detained and tortured by police in Diyarbakir under Article 3/c of Legal Decree N° 430. Under this decree, prisoners who have to be questioned as part of the investigation of offences giving rise to the declaration of a state of emergency may be returned to the custody of law enforcement agencies for an additional ten days of questioning. The article can be applied again after the end of the ten day-period, which allows police officers to hold individuals in custody for long periods of time."

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2003 - Source: International Federation for Human Rights

Case studies of torture and ill-treatment in Kurdish provinces ("International Investigative Mission: Turkey: Torture, still a routine practice.") [#12386],  [ID 14059]

"1) On 26 July 2002, Remzi Karadumam (36), Ugur Usar (26), and Resat Usar (26)30 were taken into police custody at the Anti-Terror branch of Ankara police headquarters. Two days later, they were handed over to the Anti-Terror Branch of police headquarters in Diyarbakir. On 30 July, a court ordered that they be remanded to Diyarbakir prison. A lawyer met them in prison on 31 July, and reported that they had been subjected to torture and ill treatment including beating and electric shocks while taken into police custody in Ankara. This reportedly worsened after they were transferred to police detention in Diyarbakir. There, they were also apparently sprayed repeatedly with pressurized cold water, had their testicles squeezed, were blindfolded continuously, forced to stay standing by having their wrist handcuffed to an elevated point, not given anything to eat and drink, and two police officers reportedly forced the detainees' head between their legs by sitting on their shoulders. The lawyer observed that the three men were in a very bad physical and psychological state and that there was severe bruising and marks of biting on the arms and legs of R.K. On the basis of the testimonies, the lawyer lodged a complaint about the alleged torture and ill treatment with the Diyarbakir Prosecutor. As a result of the complaint, the three men were taken from prison to be examined by doctors at the local Institute of Forensic Medicine who determined that they should rather be examined at the Medical Faculty of Dicle University, where there was a greater expertise in documenting such injuries. However, on the same day, the Diyarbakir State Security Court (DGM) ordered that R.K, U.U., and R.U. be brought instead to the Anti-Terror Branch of Diyarbakir police headquarters for further interrogation. This was carried out under article 3c) of the Legal Decree N°430 (which allows individuals to be returned from prison to police detention for an additional 10 days of questioning). Consequently, the three men were taken back into police custody where they were at risk of further torture and ill treatment and not taken to the Medical Faculty of Dicle University.

2) On November 6, 2001, while travelling from Diyarbakir to Van by bus, a woman B.K.31 was arrested by the gendarmes and taken into custody at the Balaban gendarme station. She was reportedly blindfolded and transferred to another place. There, jandarmas took her fingers print. Later one, she learnt that she was in Gevas jandarma station. She was held in a small cell completely isolated without any access to a lawyer or even to other arrested persons. B.K. was allegedly forced to stay in a corridor and then brought to another cell where jandarmas started to interrogate her while she remained blindfolded. She was beaten, subjected to falaka, threatened with death and rape, insulted, forced to remain naked, exposed to pressurized cold water and sexually abused. She was further forced to drink a juice with a pill inside and lost control. When she woke up, she felt a strong pain in her genital organs and asked to go to the toilets because of the bleedings. B.K. was reported to have been raped for Turkey: Torture, still a routine practice five days in the jandarma station and forced to sign documents. She was then presented to a doctor three times during the custody period for a medical examination, but was unable to report the torture due to the presence of a jandarma in the examination room.

3) Seval Bayindir, deputy SG of the People's Democracy party (HADEP), alleged that her brother Ônder Bayindir32 was subjected to torture at the Eskisehir Police Headquarter. She visited him in prison and he told her that he had been sprayed with high-pressurized cold water, beaten to the head and had his testicles squeezed during the two days custody. Önder Bayindir was detained on November 25, 2002 on the allegation of "supporting an illegal organization". Last year, he was discharged from Eskisehir Anatolian University for four semesters for having signed petitions demanding education in Kurdish.

4) Siracettin Karatas33, working for the Kurdish newspaper "Azadia Welat" in Mersin, alleged that he was ill treated after his detention on November 16, 2002. Police officers stopped him in Demirtas quarter when he was distributing the newspaper and asserted that an arrest warrant had been issued against him. They beat and kicked him and took him to the Yumuktepe Police Station. He was handcuffed and thrown into a cell and then interrogated by Anti-terror department's officers. He was threatened with death and told to go back immediately to Bitlis. He was allegedly beaten again and twice taken to the hospital, but despite pains in his hands, his face and in his back, the doctor did not note any complaint. The next day at 3 pm, Demirtas was taken to the prosecutor's office and released without even seeing the prosecutor.

5) A 24 year-old man Okan Yurdabak34 was detained at the gendarmerie station in Satay district (Van) on November 5, 2002 after a quarrel between inhabitants of Beyaslan village concerning the ownership of land. Two people had accused him of shooting in the air and the soldiers had asked him for his weapon. When he insisted that he did not have any weapon, he was thrown into a cell, stripped naked and a lieutenant, a sergeant together with a soldier beat him. Later on, they poured salt over his mouth and eyes and he was subjected to the falaka. At the end, the sergeant and the soldier took him to the bathroom and raped him with a truncheon. On November 6, a doctor examined him but he was not informed about the medical conclusions. The prosecutor ordered his release apparently criticizing the soldiers for having ill-treated him. On November 7, Okan Yurdabak filed an official complaint. The prosecutor sent him to Van State Hospital, where he was given a medical report certifying inability to work for 15 days."

Document(s): Open document

01.05.2003 - Source: International Federation for Human Rights

Examples of sexual violence perpetrated by State actors ("International Investigative Mission: Turkey: Torture, still a routine practice.") [#12386],  [ID 14060]

"Some examples of sexual violence perpetrated by State actors in Turkey are the following:
1) On September 23, 2002, 21 years old Kurdish woman X.36 was arrested by police officers and taken to the Anti-terror Branch of Istanbul Police Headquarters on suspicion of being a member of an illegal organization and was detained for 4 days until September 27. X. was reported to have been forced to stand on her feet with her hands pressed to the wall, forced to do movements, beaten, forced to recite the Fatiha sura (a verse of the Coran), deprived of food and toilets, subjected to pressurized cold water, including into her vagina, forced to lie naked on the ground, seized by the hair, to have been spat into her mouth and nose, threatened with rape, stripped naked, blindfolded, her breasts squeezed, forced to take a police officer penis into her mouth, subjected to the Palestinian hanging and given electric shocks (including into the vagina). On September 27, X. was sent to the public prosecutor's office at the Istanbul State Security Court and examined by a forensic doctor (Adli Tip Hekimi). After a very detailed examination, the doctor identified some marks of torture on her back and shoulders. The victim is now held in Bakirköy Women and Children' Prison and Detention centre. She is gravely affected psychologically. A judicial prosecution against the perpetrators is being prepared by the lawyers and the trial file opened by the State Security Court is being followed by the lawyers of "Legal Aid for Women Raped or Sexually Assaulted by State Security Forces" Project in Istanbul.
2) On September 24, 2002, around 6.30 pm, 27 years old Alevi woman Y.37 was arrested by police officers at the Göztepe Cesme bus stop, in Istanbul. She was taken into a police car where the police officers addressed her by another name and brought her to the Anti-terror branch of the Istanbul Police Directorate. There, female police officers carried out a body search and she was accused of being a member of an illegal organisation and strongly urged to admit it, and to work for the police. She was allegedly blindfolded, and forced to remain standing. An officer called "Sari" (blond) and whom the victim knows from his voice, reportedly made sounds that suggest sexual intercourse, opened the victim's mouth and spat into it, while other officers held the victim's hands from behind, hit her head preventing her from spitting and forcing her to swallow. At this moment, police officers continuously touched X's body through her clothes. She was reportedly subjected to food, water and sleep deprivation during the whole night while remaining blindfolded, forced to perform movements, mocked, threatened, held by the hair, thrown to the ground and beaten. She was asked if she was virgin and mocked for being from Tunceli, in the southeast. In the morning, she was taken to another floor, stripped naked, and police officers opened her mouth again, spat into it forcing her to swallow many times and rubbed their penises against the victim's sexual organs while she remained standing and blindfolded. She was sprayed with high-pressurized cold water. The last day, police officers sexually abused her, trying to insert a hose into her anus by force while spraying her with high-pressure water. She was reportedly kicked in the stomach and on the sexual organ. On September 27, the victim was brought to the public prosecutor's office at the Istanbul State Security Court. She was presented to a doctor (Adli Tip Hekimi) who conducted a very detailed medical examination and identified marks of torture on her back and shoulders. The victim is now held in the Bakirköy Women and Children's Prison and detention Centre and had applied to be admitted to the Bakirköy Psychiatric Hospital due to serious physical and psychological consequences of the torture she was submitted to.
3) On December 19, 2000, 22 year-old woman Z.38, detained in Ümraniye prison, was subjected to violence and sexual abuse during the so-called "Return to life" operation39 in the Istanbul prison. It was reported that Special teams (security forces) used bulldozers to destroy the walls and enter the prison. Prisoners were forced to gather together into the women's ward where the victim was in an open space and they were subjected to a high-pressure water cannon. She was subjected to verbal and physical abuse and threatened with rape. She was then subjected to sexual abuse by the security forces at the moment of the operation. Following these events, X began a death fast in prison and has contracted the "Wernicke Korsakoff" syndrome."

Document(s): Open document

31.03.2003 - Source: US Department of State

Torture was generally alleged to occur in the first 24 hours of police or Jandarma detention; security officials often used methods that did not leave physical traces ("Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2002") [#11861],  [ID 14057]

"AI visited 13 provinces during the year and concluded that torture remained "widespread" and "systematic," despite legal reforms reducing periods of pretrial and incommunicado detention (see Section 1.d.). Torture was generally alleged to occur in the first 24 hours of police or Jandarma detention. AI concluded that torture remained pervasive regardless of the approval or disapproval of higher-ranking government officials or political leaders. The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) reported that, during its March visit, delegates gathered compelling evidence of torture and severe ill treatment of several persons held in Diyarbakir in late 2001.

Human rights observers and medical experts said that security officials often used methods that did not leave physical traces, such as beating detainees with weighted bags instead of clubs or fists, or applying electric shocks to a metal chair where the detainee sits, rather than directly to the body. Commonly employed methods of torture reported by AI and the HRF's treatment centers included: Repeated beatings; stripping and blindfolding; exposure to extreme cold or high-pressure cold water hoses; electric shocks; beatings on the soles of the feet (falaka) and genitalia; hanging by the arms; food and sleep deprivation; heavy weights hung on the body; water dripped onto the head; burns; hanging sandbags on the neck; near-suffocation by placing bags over the head; vaginal and anal rape with truncheons and, in some instances, gun barrels; squeezing and twisting of testicles; and other forms of sexual abuse. In some cases, multiple torture methods (e.g., hanging and electric shocks) were employed at the same time. Other methods used were forced prolonged standing, isolation, loud music, witnessing or hearing incidents of torture, being driven to the countryside for a mock execution, and threats to detainees or their family members."

Document(s): Open document

31.03.2003 - Source: US Department of State

Number of credible applications by torture victims at its 5 national treatment centers approximately 965, compared with 1,200 in 200 ("Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2002") [#11861],  [ID 14058]

"The Constitution prohibits such practices; however, some members of the security forces continued regularly to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse persons. Leftists and radical Islamists were more likely than others to suffer torture. Despite the Government's cooperation with unscheduled foreign inspection teams, public pledges by successive governments to end the practice, and government initiatives designed to address the problem, torture continued to be widespread, particularly in the southeast. However, domestic human rights advocates and a variety of foreign observers continued to report a gradual decrease in the practice.

HRF estimated the number of credible applications by torture victims at its 5 national treatment centers to be approximately 965, compared with 1,200 in 2001. These figures included complaints stemming from previous years' incidents. Human rights advocates believed that thousands of detainees were tortured during the year in the southeast, where the problem was particularly serious, but that only 5 to 20 percent reported torture because they feared retaliation or believed that complaints were futile.

Some of the factors affecting the lower rate of torture were reductions in the periods of incommunicado detention; the near-absence of PKK violence; the phased lifting of the state of emergency in the southeast; and the increased scrutiny of the country due to its EU candidacy."

Document(s): Open document

26.02.2003 - Source: Amnesty International

Amnesty International - Violence against women in custody ("End sexual violence against women in custody!") [#11040],  [ID 14061]

Document(s): Open document

09.10.2002 - Source: European Commission

European Commission: Prevention of torture and mistreatment ("2002 Regular Report on Turkey's Process Towards Accession") [#10217],  [ID 14062]

"With regard to the prevention of torture and mistreatment, pre-trial detention periods in
police custody have been reduced to a maximum of four days, with a possible extension
of three days in the provinces still under emergency rule. In these provinces Decree 430,
which allows detainees to be returned to custody for periods of up to ten days, continues
to apply. In such cases, the detainee is deprived of access to a lawyer and of contacts with
relatives. In September the Minister of Justice issued a circular urging the judicial
authorities to avoid any misuse of the provisions of Decree 430."

Document(s): Open document

09.09.2002 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

International Helsinki Federation: ("OSCE Human Dimension Implementation Meeting Warsaw, 9-19 September 2002. Statements by the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF)") [#8556],  [ID 14063]

Document(s): Open document
02343osce.pdf

22.07.2002 - Source: UN Committee Against Torture

Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees held in police custody are apparently still widespread in Turkey ("Consideration of Reports submitted by States Parties under Article 19 of the Convention; Second periodic reports of States parties due in 1993; Addendum; Turkey [CAT/C/20/Add.8]") [#34210],  [ID 14054]

"B. Positive aspects

4. The Committee welcomes the following positive aspects:
[...]

(d) The inclusion in domestic legislation of the principle that evidence obtained through torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings;
[...]

(g) The acceptance, in a spirit of cooperation by the State party of visits by monitoring bodies such as the special rapporteurs of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the release to the public of reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT).


C. Subjects of concern

5. The Committee expresses concern about:

(a) Numerous and consistent allegations that torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees held in police custody are apparently still widespread in Turkey;
[...]

(d) Allegations that despite the number of complaints, the prosecution and punishment of members of security forces for torture and ill-treatment are rare, proceedings are exceedingly long, sentences are not commensurate with the gravity of the crime, and officers accused of torture are rarely suspended from duty during the investigation;"

Document(s): State report
Concluding observations of 27 May 2003 [CAT/C/CR/30/5]